\ 


V 


University  of  California. 


OF 


^&: 


INTERNAL  EVIDENCE! 


'  AMERICAN 
UNITARIAN 
ASSOCIATION 


^osTON 


OP  THE 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS. 


PART    I. 

REMAKES  ON  CHRISTIANITY  AND  THE  GOSPELS. 

WITH  PARTICULAR  REFERENCE   TO 

STRAUSS'S    "LIFE    OF    JESUS." 

PART    II. 

PORTIONS  OF  AN  UNFINISHED  WORK. 


BY  ANDREWS    NORTON. 


BOSTON: 

LITTLE,    BROWN,    AND    COMPANY. 
1856. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1855,  by 

CHARLES  ELIOT  NORTON, 
in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  District  of  Massachusetts. 


CAMBRIDGE: 
BTEKEOTTPED  AND  FEINTED  BY  METCALF  AND  COMPANY. 


EDITORIAL    NOTE. 


THE  work  which  forms  the  First  Part  of  this 
volume  was  mostly  written  in  the  years  1847  and 
1848,  and,  after  its  completion,  was  laid  aside  for 
future  revision.  In  1849  a  severe  attack  of  illness 
left  the  strength  of  its  author  so  diminished,  that, 
for  a  considerable  period,  his  pursuits  were  inter- 
rupted, and  when  he  again  became  able  to  work 
he  devoted  himself,  in  the  near  prospect  of  the 
end  of  life,  to  more  important  labors  than  that  of 
revising  what  he  had  written.  At  the  time  of 
his  death,  in  1853,  the  work  was  in  the  state  in 
which  it  now  appears;  but  the  manuscript  bore 
many  notes  in  pencil  upon  passages  which  it  had 
been  in  the  mind  of  the  author  to  alter  or  enlarge. 
It  was  his  wish,  however,  that  the  work  should 
be  published;  for  whatever  changes  or  additions 
he  might  have  made  would  have  been  only  for 
the  purpose  of  enforcing,  with  still  greater  dis- 


jv  EDITORIAL   NOTE. 

tinctness  and  earnestness,  the  sentiments  and  the 
convictions  already  expressed. 

The  Second  Part  of  the  volume  consists  of  what, 
at  the  time  of  its  composition,  many  years  ago,  was 
intended  to  form  a  portion  of  a  general  treatise  on 
the  internal  evidences  of  the  genuineness  of  the 
Gospels.  This  work  was  never  finished. 

The  Appendix  consists  of  one  of  the  Lectures 
delivered  by  the  author  as  Dexter  Lecturer  in 
Harvard  University.  It  has  been  printed  here  as 
having  a  close  relation  to  the  subject  of  the 
volume. 

It  may  be  remarked,  that  many  of  the  internal 
proofs  of  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels  are 
pointed  out  and  illustrated  in  the  Notes  accom- 
panying the  author's  Translation  of  the  Gospels. 

The  few  editorial  notes  are  inclosed  in  brack- 
ets. Whatever  is  so  inclosed  is  editorial,  except 
where  the  brackets  are  used  in  the  course  of 
quotations. 

CAMBRIDGE,  February,  1855. 


CONTENTS. 


PART  I. 

REMARKS  ON  CHRISTIANITY  AND  THE  GOSPELS,  WITH 
PARTICULAR  REFERENCE  TO  STRAUSS'S  "LIFE  OF  JE- 
SUS"   1 

INTRODUCTION 3 

Mode  of  pursuing  the  inquiry  concerning  the  internal  evi- 
dence of  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  pp.  3-5.  —  Par- 
ticular notice  to  be  taken  of  the  late  attacks  of  the  infidel 
theologians  of  Germany  on  the  credibility  of  the  Gospels, 
pp.  5-7. — Strauss's  "  Life  of  Jesus,"  pp.  8,  9.  — Impractica- 
bility of  separating  the  internal  evidences  of  the  genuineness 
of  the  Gospels  from  those  of  their  authenticity,  pp.  10,  11, 
—  A  main  design  of  the  present  work  is  to  remove  errors 
•which  obscure  these  evidences,  p.  12. — An  essential  error 
of  this  kind  is  the  doctrine  that  the  Gospels  are  infallible 
books,  written  by  divine  inspiration,  p.  13.  —  Remarks  on 
this  doctrine,  pp.  13-17. 

CHAPTER    I. 

GENERAL  REMARKS  ON  STRAUSS'S  THEORY  OF  THE  ORIGIN 

OF  CHRISTIANITY 18 

Essentially  coincident  with  speculations  advanced  by  Volney, 
pp.  18-20.  —  General  view  of  his  theory,  pp.  20-31.  — It 
supposes,  that  some  among  the  Jews  converted  their  imagi- 
nations of  an  expected  Messiah  into  fictions  concerning 
Jesus,  which  were  afterwards  embodied  in  the  Gospels,  pp. 
20,  21 ;  —  that  these  fictions  or  mytlii  were  not  generally 


VI  CONTENTS. 

intentional  falsehoods,  the  Apostles  and  their  associates  not 
being  responsible  for  them,  pp.  21-27  ;  —  and  that  most  of 
them  became  current  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
p.  27.  —  Explanation  of  their  rapid  growth  and  recep- 
tion among  the  Jews,  pp.  28-31.  —  Remarks  on  this 
theory,  pp.  31-45.  —  The  innocent  impostors  who  prop- 
agated these  mythi  concerning  Jesus  must  have  been 
everywhere  contradicted  by  those  acquainted  with  his 
history,  pp.  31-33.  —  Impossible  that  they  should  have 
succeeded  in  imposing  them  on  the  whole  Christian  world 
as  the  original  accounts  of  the  Apostles  and  their  asso- 
ciates, pp.  34,  35.  —  Another  part  of  their  task  con- 
sisted in  identifying  the  history  of  Jesus  with  the  Jewish 
anticipations  concerning  the  Messiah,  p.  36.  —  No  attempt 
could  be  more  hopeless  or  more  foolish,  pp.  37-39.  —  The 
communication  of  Christianity  to  the  Gentile  world  not  ex- 
plained by  Strauss,  p.  39.  —  Necessary  inferences  from  his 
theory  on  this  point  contrary  to  indisputable  facts,  pp.  40, 
41.  —  Character  and  facilities  of  those  by  whom,  according 
to  his  theory,  Christianity  must  be  supposed  to  have  been 
established  in  the  heathen  world,  pp.  42-44.  —  Impossible 
that  such  agents  should  have  succeeded  under  such  circum- 
stances, pp.  44,  45.  —  Concluding  remarks,  p.  46. 

CHAPTER   H. 

REMAKES  ON  OTHER  THEORIES 47 

General  remarks,  pp.  47,  48.  —  Account  of  the  infidel  theory 
prevalent  in  Germany  previously  to  that  of  Strauss,  p.  49. 
—  Concerning  these  theories  some  preliminary  considera- 
tions to  be  attended  to,  p.  49.  —  Extraordinary  phenomena 
to  be  accounted  for  by  him  who  reasons  against  the  divine 
origin  of  our  religion,  whatever  period  he  may  assign  for 
the  commencement  of  its  authentic  history,  pp.  50-62.— 
The  existence  of  Christianity  and  its  results  in  the  last 
quarter  of  the  second  century,  pp.  50  -  52.  —  (The  character 
of  our  religion  such  as  to  compel  the  reverence  of  those  who 
deny  its  divine  origin,  pp.  52-54.)  —  The  conception  of 
Jesus  presented  in  the  Gospels,  and  the  view  given  in  them 


CONTENTS.  Vll 

of  his  character  and  his  ministry,  pp.  54-62.  —  How  are 
these  phenomena  to  be  accounted  for  by  unbelievers? 
The  theories  of  modern  infidel  writers  may  be  resolved  into 
one,  pp.  62-64. 

CHAPTER  III. 

EXAMINATION  OF  STRAUSS'S  Two  FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCI- 
PLES OF  CRITICISM 65 

Strauss's  work  mainly  occupied  by  an  attack  on  the  credibility 
and  genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  p.  65.  —  Statement  of  two 
principles  of  criticism  laid  down  by  him  as  tests  to  determine 
that  an  account  is  not  to  be  believed,  p.  66.  —  Remarks  on 
the  first  of  these  principles, — the  impossibility  of  a  miracle, 
pp.  66,  67.  —  Remarks  on  the  second  of  these  principles, — 
that  an  account  which  lays  claim  to  historical  value  must  not 
contradict  other  accounts,  pp.  67-70.  —  Illustration  of  the 
character  of  Strauss's  criticism  on  the  Gospels  by  applying 
his  process  to  the  accounts  of  the  assassination  of  Caesar,  pp. 
70-82.  —  Such  criticism  inapplicable  to  human  testimony, 
p.  82.  —  Want  of  complete  agreement  between  narratives  of 
the  same  event  not  inconsistent  with  their  essential  truth, 
pp.  82,  83.  —  The  discrepances  among  the  Gospels  of  such  a 
character  as  to  confirm  their  authenticity,  but  disprove  their 
inspiration,  pp.  84,  85.  —  Used  by  Strauss,  however,  in  the 
attempt  to  disprove  their  authenticity  and  genuineness  con- 
sidered as  the  proper  works  of  human  authors,  p.  85. —  This 
use  not  new,  p.  85.  —  Example  from  Paine's  "  Age  of  Rea- 
son," pp.  85,  86.  —  First  part  of  Strauss's  work  occupied  with 
a  prolix  discussion  of  the  difficulties  in  the  first  two  chapters 
of  Matthew  and  the  first  two  chapters  of  Luke,  p.  87.  —  Re- 
marks on  his  argument,  pp.  87-93.  —  Neither  the  supposed 
errors  of  the  Evangelists  in  these  chapters,  nor  the  incon- 
sistencies between  the  two  narratives,  discredit  the  fact -of 
the  miraculous  birth  of  our  Lord,  pp.  93  -  95.  —  But  the  only 
question  to  be  settled  is,.  Do,  or  do  not,  the  Gospels  present 
such  appearances  as  to  make  it  evident,  or  to  create  a  pre- 
sumption, that  their  writers  were  not  well  informed  and 
trustworthy  witnesses  respecting  the  events  of  the  public 


VUl  CONTENTS. 

ministry  of  Jesus  ?  p.  95.  —  Not  to  be  confounded  with  the 
question,  whether  the  narratives  in  the  Gospels  are  free 
from  error,  p.  96.  —  The  conclusion  arrived  at  by  Strauss 
that  the  Gospels  are  not  genuine  invalidates  his  arguments 
against  the  truth  of  Christianity,  pp.  96,  97.  —  Supposing 
the  truth  of  our  religion,  if  the  Gospels  were  not  written  till 
the  second  century,  it  would  be  altogether  unreasonable  to 
expect  that  they  would  be  exposed  to  fewer  objections  than 
he  has  urged  against  them,  pp.  97,  98.  —  To  prove  the  gen- 
uineness of  the  Gospels  is  to  prove  the  truth  of  Christianity, 
but  to  disprove  their  genuineness  is  no  step  toward  dis- 
proving its  truth,  pp.  98-100.  —  Influence  of  the  work  of 
Strauss,  pp.  100,  101.  —  Its  characteristic  tone,  p.  102. 

CHAPTER   IV. 

ON  SOME  IMPORTANT  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  GOSPELS    103 

The  Gospels  as  literary  compositions,  pp.  103-115. — They  are 
among  the  most  imperfect  of  histories,  pp.  103  - 105.  They 
imply  that  the  great  outlines  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus,  and 
many  circumstances  connected  with  his  history,  were  already 
known  to  their  readers,  pp.  105,  106.  —  Their  accounts  of 
our  Lord's  appearances  after  his  resurrection  an  example  of 
the  manner  in  which  they  assume  the  existence  of  knowl- 
edge on  the  part  of  their  readers  beyond  what  they  furnish, 
pp.  106-108.  —  True  character  of  the  Gospels,  and  purpose 
for  which  they  were  written,  pp.  109,  110.  —  Want  of  skill 
in  the  Evangelists  as  literary  artists,  pp.  110,  111.  —  The 
Gospels  in  construction  and  style  correspond  to  the  charac- 
ter and  circumstances  of  their  authors,  p.  111.  —  The  char- 
acter of  the  Gospels  exposes  them  to  the  attacks  of  minute 
criticism,  p.  111. — Difficulties  disappear  in  proportion  to 
the  justness  of  our  conceptions  and  the  extent  of  our  knowl- 
edge of  the  circumstances  of  their  composition,  p.  112. — 
Two  classes  of  difficulties,  pp.  112,  113.  — The  defects  of 
the  Gospels  as  literary  compositions  afford  striking  evidence 
of  their  authenticity,  pp.  113  —  115.  —  General  ignorance 
concerning  the  true  character  of  the  Gospels,  and  conse- 
quent incorrect  conceptions  of  Christianity,  pp.  115-120. 


CONTENTS.  x 

—  Neglected  state  in  which  the  Gospels  have  been  left  for 
popular  use,  p.  115.  —  Faults  of  the  Common  Version,  p. 
116.  —  Other  obstacles  to  obtaining  correct  notions  of  their 
character,  p.  117. — Want  of  information  concerning  the 
Gospels  has  involved  the  whole  subject  of  our  religion  in 
obscurity,  pp.  118,  119.  —  Ground  for  encouragement  in  the 
gradual  advance  in  religious  knowledge,  pp.  119, 120. —  Re- 
marks  on  the  outburst  of  the  revolutions  of  1848,  pp.  121  - 
123.  —  Such  changes  in  themselves  afford  no  certainty  of 
improvement,  p.  123.  —  To  Christianity  better  understood 
we  must  look  for  all  essential  improvement  in  the  character 
and  condition  of  men,  pp.  123  - 125. 

CHAPTER  V. 

ON  WHAT  ESSENTIALLY  CONSTITUTES  THE  VALUE  OF  CHRIS- 
TIANITY AND   OF   THE   GOSPELS 126 

The  essential  value  of  Christianity  consists  in  its  being  a  mirac- 
ulous revelation  of  God,  p.  126.  —  If  such  a  revelation  has 
been  made,  the  truths  of  religion  rest  on  the  witness  of  God 
himself,  p.  127.  —  And  it  is  only  through  such  a  revelation 
that  these  truths  can  be  known,  p.  127.  —  Illustration  of  the 
latter  proposition,  pp.  127-143.  —  What  can  human  reason 
alone  effect  toward  establishing  the  facts  on  which  religion 
is  founded?  It  may  assure  us  that  there  is  an  infinite 
cause  of  all  finite  things,  p.  128  ;  —  that  the  Infinite  Being 
is  intelligent  and  benevolent,  pp.  128,  129  ;  —  and  that  this 
Being  is  unchangeable,  p.  129.  —  But  before  this  conception 
of  God  Reason  stands  confounded,  p.  130.  —  In  contemplat- 
ing the  relations  of  God  to  finite  beings,  difficulties  present 
themselves  which  she  cannot  solve,  pp.  130-134.  —  These 
difficulties  resolve  themselves  into  the  question,  What  are 
the  relations  of  the  Infinite  Spirit  to  each  one  of  us  individ- 
ually ?  pp.  134-136.  —  The  answer  to  this  question  given 
by  the  supernatural  manifestation  of  God  through  Christ, 
p.  136. —  Objections  brought  against  the  idea  of  such  a  rev- 
elation, pp.  136,  137.  —  These  objections  founded  on  erro- 
neous conceptions,  p.  137. —  Astonishing  as  the  fact  of  such 
a  revelation  is,  there  is  nothing  in  the  belief  of  it  to  offend 


X  CONTENTS. 

our  reason,  pp.  137-139. — Our  misapprehensions  arise  from 
the  narrowness  of  our  conceptions,  pp.  139,  140. — Truths 
made  known  to  us  by  Christianity,  p.  140.  —  Its  inestimable 
value  as  a  miraculous  revelation,  pp.  141,  142. — Plainness 
of  its  evidences,  p.  142.  —  It  still  leaves  us  in  great  igno- 
rance, p.  143.  —  But  it  has  taught  us  all  that  is  necessary  to 
know  as  the  foundation  of  the  highest  virtue  and  the  most 
glorious  hopes,  p.  143.  —  The  Gospels  are  the  history  and 
permanent  evidences  of  this  miraculous  revelation,  pp.  143, 
144. — Their  character,  pp.  144,  145.  —  The  union  of  hu- 
man error  and  imperfection  with  their  great  essential  char- 
acteristics renders  them  a  standing  miracle  in  evidence  of 
the  truth  of  Christianity,  p.  146. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

STRAUSS'S    PROPOSED    SUBSTITUTE   FOR   CHRISTIANITY. — 
KEMARKS  ON  MODERN  GERMAN  PHILOSOPHY  .        .        .147 

The  Concluding  Dissertation  of  Strauss's  book  full  of  instruc- 
tion, p.  147.  —  Extract  from  it  concerning  the  results  of  his 
inquiry,  pp.  147,  148. — He  proposes  "to  re-establish  dog- 
matically that  which  has  been  destroyed  critically,"  p.  148. 
—  Obscurity  of  this  language,  and  absurdity  of  the  meaning 
which  appears  to  be  intended,  pp.  148,  149.  —  Further  ex- 
tracts from  Strauss,  relating  to  his  proffered  substitute  for 
Christianity,  pp.  149-151.  —  He  "  perceives  the  substance 
of  the  Christian  religion  to  be  identical  with  the  deepest 
philosophical  truth";  that  is,  with  the  atheistic  philosophy 
of  Hegel,  pp.  151,  152.  —  Extracts  from  Strauss  relating  to 
this  philosophy,  pp.  153,  154.  —  "The  key  of  the  whole 
Christology,"  pp.  155-157.  —  The  Concluding  Dissertation 
of  Strauss's  work  affords  materials  for  forming  an  estimate  of 
the  speculations  of  modern  German  philosophers  (so  called) 
in  theology  and  metaphysics,  p.  157.  —  Character  of  these 
speculations,  pp.  158,  159.  —  The  school  of  writers  to  which 
Strauss  belongs  not  distinguished  by  its  peculiar  doctrines, 
but  by  its  mysticism  and  abuse  of  language,  pp.  160,  161. — 
Its  antiquity  and  extensive  prevalence,  pp.  161-163. — 
Its  high  pretensions,  pp.  163-165.  —  Its  mischievous  influ- 
ence, pp.  165-168. 


CONTENTS.  Xi 

CHAPTER  VII. 

CONCLUDING  REMARKS .169 

Efficiency  of  such  works  as  that  of  Strauss  in  the  production 
of  evil,  liable  to  be  underrated,  p.  169.  —  Importance  of  cor- 
rect opinions,  p.  170.  —  The  improvement  of  our  race  de- 
pends on  the  prevalence  of  truth,  p.  170.  —  How  those 
truths  upon  which  our  characters  should  be  formed  are  to 
be  established,  pp.  171, 172.  —  Remarks  on  the  position  of 
America  in  regard  to  the  attainment  and  promulgation  of 
truth,  pp.  172  —  188.  Peculiar  advantages  in  this  country, 
p.  172.  —  Discouraging  circumstances,  p.  173. — Neglect  of 
the  higher  departments  of  thought  and  learning,  p.  173. — 
For  example,  of  the  sciences  of  political  government  and 
political  economy,  p.  1 74.  —  Evils  of  ignorance  in  these 
departments  of  knowledge  exhibited  in  the  condition  of 
France  and  Germany,  pp.  175-17  7.  Neglect  of  the  studies 
which  discipline  the  intellect  so  that  it  may  be  correctly  ex- 
ercised, p.  177.  —  Neglect  of  the  sciences  of  religion  and 
morals,  pp.  178,  179.  —  The  study  of  theology  essentially 
connected  with  almost  all  the  other  important  branches  of 
knowledge,  pp.  179,  180.  —  Tendency  of  our  times  to  dis- 
connect the  truths  of  religion  from  the  discussion  of  those 
subjects  which  concern  the  present  well-being  of  men,  p. 
181.  —  Much  to  be  learned  and  taught  in  the  sciences  of 
religion  and  morals,  pp.  182  —  184.  —  No  proper  provision  in 
our  literary  institutions  for  the  prosecution  of  the  most  im- 
portant studies,  pp.  184,  185. —  The  great  want  in  our 
country  is  that  of  a  body  of  men  qualified  to  give  instruc- 
tion on  these  subjects,  p.  186.  —  The  influence  of  the  great 
truths  of  religion  and  morals  determines  the  fate  of  society, 
p.  187.  —  Responsibility  of  Americans  as  the  advanced 
guard  of  the  civilized  world,  pp.  187, 188. 


CONTENTS. 


PART    II. 

ON  THE  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE  GENUINENESS  OF 
THE  GOSPELS  ;  BEING  PORTIONS  OF  AN  UNFINISHED 
WORK  . 189 

CHAPTER    I. 

THE  CONSISTENCY  OF  THE  NARRATIVE  IN  THE  GOSPELS 
WITH  ITSELF,  AND  WITH  ALL  OUR  KNOWLEDGE  BEARING 
ON  THE  SUBJECT 191 

The  internal  evidences  of  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels  not 
to  be  separated  from  those  of  their  authenticity,  pp.  191, 
192.  —  Among  the  most  important  proofs  of  both  is  the  con- 
sistency of  the  narrative  in  the  Gospels  with  itself,  and  with 
all  other  known  facts  having  a  bearing  upon  it.  State- 
ment of  this  argument,  pp.  192-196.  —  This  consistency 
discovers  itself  throughout  the  Gospels,  p.  193.  —  Is  not  the 
work  of  study  or  artifice,  pp.  193,  194.  —  Appears  more 
clearly,  in  proportion  to  the  extent  and  accuracy  of  our 
knowledge,  pp.  194-1915. — The  same  argument  presented 
under  another  form,  pp.  196-201.  —  The  Gospels  contain 
much  that  requires  explanation,  p.  196.  —  This  explanation 
to  be  sought  from  a  great  variety  of  sources,  p.  197. —  The 
narratives  in  the  Gospels  accord  with  all  that  we  can  learn 
or  reasonably  infer  respecting  the  subjects  to  which  they  re- 
late, p.  197.  —  If  the  Gospels  were  not  true,  such  agreement 
could  not  exist,  pp.  198, 199. —  Consideration  of  what  is 
implied  in  the  hypothesis  that  they  are  narratives  of  fic- 
titious events,  p.  200.  —  The  character  of  the  Gospels,  then, 
establishes  the  truth  of  the  testimony  to  their  genuineness, 
p.  201.  — The  preceding  argument  a  cumulative  one,  p.  201. 
—  Examples  of  its  application,  pp.  202-218.  —  Explana- 
tion of  a  portion  of  the  eighteenth  chapter  of  the  Gospel 
of  Matthew,  for  the  purpose  of  pointing  out  its  intrinsic 
marks  of  truth,  pp.  202  -  212. —  Similar  explanation  of  the 
narrative  concerning  the  young  man  who  came  to  Christ 


CONTENTS.  Xlll 

addressing  him,  "  Good  teacher,  what  good  thing  shall  I  do 
to  have  eternal  life  ?  "  pp.  212  -  218.  —  Conclusion,  p.  218. 

CHAPTER  II. 

OBJECTIONS  AGAINST  THE   CONSISTENCY  OP  THE  NARRA- 
TIVE CONSIDERED 219 

It  may  be  said  that  the  effect  produced  by  the  ministry  of 
Christ  upon  the  Jewish  nation  was  inconsistent  with  what 
we  might  reasonably  expect,  supposing  his  history  to  be 
true ;  —  that  such  miracles  as  are  ascribed  to  him  must  have 
produced  conviction,  pp.  219,  220.  Consideration  of  this 
objection,  pp.  220-230.  —  An  error  to  suppose  that  men 
will  always  believe  and  act  as  it  is  in  the  highest  degree 
reasonable  that  they  should  believe  and  act,  pp.  220,  221. — 
Circumstances  to  be  considered  which  produced  in  the 
minds  of  the  Jews  a  false  estimate  of  the  weight  of  the  evi- 
dence for  the  divinity  of  our  Saviour's  mission,  p.  221. — 
They  regarded  his  miracles  as  performed  through  the  agen- 
cy of  evil  spirits,  pp.  221  -  223.  —  The  holiness  of  his  char- 
acter and  of  his  teachings  did  not  deter  them  from  this 
opinion,  but  was  in  itself  a  cause  of  their  hatred  against  him, 
p.  224.  —  The  religious  pride  of  the  Jews,  and  their  expec- 
tations concerning  a  Messiah,  p.  224.  —  Christ  appeared  to 
humble  their  pride  and  prostrate  their  hopes,  pp.  225,  226. 
Feelings  of  bitter  hostility  with  which  they  naturally  re- 
garded him,  as  a  moral  and  religious  reformer,  opposing 
their  strongest  prejudices,  pp.  226  —  229.  —  An  ignorant 
and  superstitious  people  not  likely  to  be  particularly  af- 
fected by  miracles,  pp.  229,  230.  —  From  the  preceding 
considerations  it  appears  that  the  result  of  Christ's  ministry 
was  such  as  we  might  reasonably  expect,  p.  230.  —  These 
statements  may  be  viewed  under  a  different  aspect, 
p.  230. —  Striking  correspondence  in  the  Gospels  with  the 
representations  that  have  been  given,  p.  231.  —  The  reality 
of  Christ's  miracles  appears  to  have  been  unquestioned, 
pp.  231-233.  —  This  is  not  the  case,  however,  concerning 
the  miracle  of  his  resurrection,  p.  233.  —  This  exception 
such  as  to  confirm  the  argument  derived  from  the  fact 
b 


XIV  CONTENTS. 

just  mentioned,  pp.  233,  234.  —  This  fact  corresponds  to 
the  supposition  of  the  truth  of  the  Gospels,  but  does  not 
correspond  to  any  other  supposition  that  can  be  made, 
pp.  234  -  238.  —  Summary  of  the  argument  on  this  point, 
p.  238.  —  The  history  contained  in  the  Gospels  may  be 
divided  into  two  parts  :  one,  containing  narratives  of  mirac- 
ulous events ;  the  other,  accounts  of  the  discourses  of  our 
Saviour,  of  his  actions  not  miraculous,  and  of  the  dis- 
positions, words,  and  actions  of  others,  p.  238.  —  Between 
these  two  portions  there  is  a  perfect  correspondence,  pp. 
239,  240.  —  Such  is  the  consistency  of  these  different  por- 
tions, that  the  whole  narrative  must  be  true,  or  the  whole 
must  be  false,  p.  241.  —  No  one  will  contend  that  it  is 
merely  fictitious,  p.  241. —  Supposition  of  those  who  deny 
the  truth  of  the  Gospel  history,  p.  241.  —  But  to  any  suppo- 
sition which  denies  the  truth  of  the  miracles,  the  consistency 
of  the  history  presents  a  conclusive  objection,  pp.  242  -  244. 

CHAPTER  III. 

THE  CHARACTER  OF  CHRIST  AS  IT  APPEARS  IN  THE  GOS- 
PELS        245 

SECTION  I. 
His  Teaching .        .        .245 

The  perfect  exhibition  of  moral  excellence  in  the  teachings 
and  actions  of  Christ  a  proof  of  the  genuineness  of  the  writ- 
ings in  which  it  appears,  p.  245.  —  Statement  of  the  argu- 
ment, pp.  245  -  248.  —  The  Gospels  contain  just  conceptions 
of  a  perfect  system  of  religion  as  taught  by  a  divine  teacher, 
pp.  245,  246.  —  Their  writers  derived  these  conceptions 
either  from  reality  or  from  their  own  imaginations,  p.  246. 
—  They  could  not  have  derived  them  from  imagination,  p. 
247.  —  Circumstances  under  which  Christ  appeared,  pp.  248, 
249.  —  The  great  characteristics  of  his  preaching,  pp.  249- 
258. — His  teachings  concerning  God,  pp.  249  -  252.  —  Con- 
cerning immortality,  pp.  252  —  255.  —  Concerning  the  moral 
responsibility  of  men  as  immortal  beings,  pp.  255-257.  — 
These  doctrines  constitute  his  religion,  p.  257.  —  To  have  a 


CONTENTS.  XV 

just  conception  of  the  force  of  the  argument  to  be  derived 
from  them,  they  should  be  compared  with  those  which  phi- 
losophy had  attained  before,  p.  258. — No  heathen  teacher 
of  a  higher  rank  than  Socrates,  p.  258.  —  His  imperfect 
conception  of  the  great  truths  of  religion,  pp.  258  -  260.  — 
Comparison  of  the  Memorabilia  of  Xenophon  with  the  Gos- 
pels, pp.  261,  262.  —  Characteristics  of  the  moral  principles 
inculcated  by  Christ,  pp.  262  -  266.  —  The  morality  which 
he  taught  the  most  pure  and  comprehensive,  p.  262.  —  As 
yet  but  imperfectly  comprehended,  p.  263.  —  Nature  and 
extent  of  its  requirements,  pp.  263  -  266.  —  How  is  it  to  be 
explained  that  such  a  system  is  found  in  the  Gospels  ?  p.  266. 

SECTION  II. 
His  Personal  Character 267 

The  personal  character  which  in  the  Gospels  is  ascribed  to 
Jesus  Christ  is  most  striking  and  original,  p.  267.  —  How  he 
is  there  represented,  pp.  267-269.  —  Truth  of  the  concep- 
tion contained  in  the  Gospels  of  the  character  which  the 
miracles  of  a  messenger  from  God  ought  to  have,  p.  269.  — 
Character  of  Christ's  discourses  in  reference  to  the  gaining 
of  followers  and  disciples,  pp.  270-272.  —  The  representa- 
tion of  these  discourses  such  that  it  must  have  been  drawn 
from  reality,  pp.  273,  274.  —  But  little  in  the  Gospels  con- 
cerning the  private  character  of  Christ  till  the  closing  scenes 
of  his  life,  p.  274.  —  In  relation  to  this  subject  there  are 
some  passages  which  require  explanation,  p.  275.  —  The 
reply  of  Jesus  to  his  mother  at  the  marriage  feast  at 
Cana,  pp.  275-279. —  His  treatment  of  the  Syro-Phoe- 
nician  woman  who  besought  him  to  cure  her  daughter,  pp. 
279  -  281.  —  The  miraculous  cure  of  the  Gadarene  dsemom- 
acs,  pp.  281-283. — These  passages  are  among  the  striking 
proofs  which  the  Gospels  everywhere  furnish,  of  the  fact  that 
their  writers  had  no  purpose  of  deceiving  by  the  display  of  an 
imaginary  character,  pp.  283,  284.  —  The  Evangelists  seem 
never  to  have  formed  an  abstract  conception  of  what  the 
character  of  Christ  really  was,  p.  284.  —  Defective  style  and 
inartificial  construction  of  their  histories,  and  evident  ab- 


XVI  CONTENTS. 

sence  in  them  of  all  aim  at  effect,  pp.  284,  285.  —  When 
we  find,  therefore,  that  from  their  entire  narratives  there 
results  a  most  wonderful,  original,  and  consistent  exhibition 
of  character,  it  is  impossible  to  ascribe  this  to  any  other 
cause  than  that  they  drew  from  reality,  p.  285.  —  The  rec- 
ords of  our  religion  show  that  their  writers  had  no  ability 
to  deceive,  and  thus  carry  with  them  independent  evidence 
of  their  own  authenticity,  pp.  286,  287.  —  One  other  pas- 
sage besides  those  already  noticed  presents  a  difficulty,  — 
that  relating  to  the  cry  of  our  Saviour  on  the  cross,  p.  287. 
—  Explanation  of  this  passage,  pp.  287-292. 


APPENDIX. 


ON  THE  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  DISCOURSES  OF  CHRIST  TO 
THE  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITION  OF  THE  JEWS,  AND 
TO  THE  CIRCUMSTANCES  IN  WHICH  HE  WAS  PLACED  .  295 

General  remarks,  pp.  295,  296.  —  In  the  tune  of  our  Saviour 
the  notions  of  the  Jews  concerning  religion  were  very  im- 
perfect and  erroneous,  p.  296.  —  Their  conceptions  of  God, 
pp.  296,  297.  — Of  the  future  life,  pp.  297,  298.  — Of 
moral  and  religious  excellence,  p.  298. — Their  political  con- 
dition at  the  time  of  our  Saviour's  ministry,  pp.  298,  299.  — 
Their  expectations  concerning  the  Messiah,  pp.  299,  300. — 
Preaching  of  John  the  Baptist,  pp.  301,  302.  —  Conception 
that  may  be  formed  of  the  appearance  of  Christ,  pp.  302, 
303. —  Commencement  of  his  ministry  in  Galilee,  p.  303. — 
The  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  pp.  304-308.  —  Spirit  of  the 
Beatitudes  contrasted  with  the  feelings  and  expectations  of 
the  Jews,  pp.  305-308.  —  Character  of  the  remainder  of 
this  discourse,  when  viewed  in  connection  with  the  moral 
and  intellectual  state  of  those  to  whom  it  was  addressed,  pp. 
308,  309.  —  The  whole  affords  decisive  evidence  that  Jesus 
Christ  was  what  he  claimed  to  be,  a  teacher  commissioned 
and  instructed  by  God,  p.  309. 


PART    I. 


REMARKS 


ON 


CHRISTIANITY    AND    THE    GOSPELS, 


WITH   PARTICULAR   REFERENCE   TO 


STRAUSS'S    "LIFE    OF   JESUS.' 


INTRODUCTION. 


IT  has  been  my  intention,  after  completing  what 
I  had  to  say  respecting  the  historical  evidence  of 
the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  to  present  a  view 
of  the  collateral,  or  of  what,  by  giving  an  allow- 
able, though  somewhat  extended,  meaning  to  the 
term,  may  be  called  the  internal  evidence  of  their 
genuineness.  It  may  seem  at  first  thought  as  if 
this  might  be  sufficiently  done  by  a  direct  state- 
ment of  the  topics  which  compose  that  evidence, 
without  adverting  to  the  objections,  founded  on 
the  contents  of  the  Gospels,  and  originating,  as  I 
conceive,  in  erroneous  conceptions  of  their  charac- 
ter, with  which  their  genuineness  and  authenticity 
have  been  assailed.  But  such  is  not  the  fact. 

It  may  be  true, — I  believe  it  to  be  true, — that, 
without  bringing  into  notice  the  false  conceptions 
of  believers,  or  the  objections  of  unbelievers,  an 
argument  may  be  framed  for  the  authenticity  of 


4         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

the  Gospels,  derived  from  the  internal  evidence 
afforded  by  them,  which  to  an  intelligent  man  may 
appear  conclusive,  as  admitting  of  no  direct  reply. 
Yet  to  an  intelligent  man  it  may  be  far  from  being 
satisfactory.  In  all  cases  of  moral  reasoning  where 
any  doubt  may  exist,  in  all  cases  where  there  is  a 
division  of  opinion,  and  men  who  have  professedly 
examined  the  question  at  issue  have  arrived  at  op- 
posite conclusions,  we  desire  to  view  the  subject 
in  all  its  aspects,  and  are  unwilling  definitely  to 
settle  our  judgment  till  we  have  heard  both  sides. 
Even  the  very  circumstance  that  an  argument  ap- 
pears to  us  decisive  may  increase  our  desire  to 
know  how  it  has  been  evaded,  or  what  other  rea- 
soning has  been  opposed  to  it.  Respecting  any 
important  subject,  we  wish  not  merely  to  attain  a 
conviction  of  the  truth,  but  also  to  comprehend 
the  bearing  of  the  truth  on  the  whole  system  of 
opinions  having  relation  to  it,  either  as  directly 
contradicting  it,  on  the  one  hand,  or,  on  the  other, 
as  disguising  it  and  keeping  it  out  of  sight  by 
misrepresentations  and  false  substitutes.  We  do 
not  care  to  have  the  sun  admitted  to  us  through 
an  opening  into  a  darkened  room.  We  desire  to 
see  the  objects  exhibited  by  it  in  broad  daylight. 
In  treating  of  the  historical  evidence  for  the 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.         5 

genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  I  have  endeavored  to 
bring  distinctly  into  view  what  has  been  asserted 
or  suggested  in  opposition  to  it.  This  it  was  easy 
to  do  in  the  course  of  the  discussion,  without  any 
preliminary  argument.  But  in  regard  to  the  sub- 
ject before  us  the  case  is  different.  In  treating 
the  historical  evidence  there  can  be  no  essential 
disagreement,  among  men  capable  of  discussing 
the  subject,  concerning  the  principles  of  reasoning 
to  be  applied  to  it.  The  only  controversy  must 
be  about  facts.  But  he  who  opposes  the  credit  of 
the  Gospels  on  the  ground  of  their  intrinsic  char- 
acter may  proceed  throughout  on  false  principles 
and  untenable  theories.  He  is  then  not  to  be  met 
in  the  course  of  the  discussion  by  particular  con- 
futations of  particular  objections,  but  by  a  previ- 
ous general  confutation  of  the  whole  tenor  of  his 
reasoning.  And  this  becomes  necessary  in  order 
to  attain  a  clear  and  satisfactory  comprehension  of 
the  subject. 

THESE  considerations  have  led  me  to  take  par- 
ticular notice  of  the  late  attacks  of  the  infidel  the- 
ologians of  Germany  on  the  credibility  of  the 
Gospels.  Such  a  mode  of  pursuing  the  inquiry  is 
particularly  demanded  at  the  present  day,  for  the 
i* 


6  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

writings  of  those  theologians  have  obtained  a  wide 
notoriety,  and  have  affected  the  minds  of  numbers 
by  whom  they  are  read,  and  of  numbers  by  whom 
they  are  not  read.  Through  the  operation  of  this 
cause,  and  of  others  of  a  more  general  nature,  whose 
working  lies  deeper,  Christianity  has  with  very 
many  ceased  to  be  regarded  as  a  subject  of  rational 
and  manly  investigation.  The  truth  is  a  sad  one, 
but  it  is  the  truth,  that  a  very  great  portion  even 
of  intelligent  men  pass  it  by,  perhaps  with  a  cer- 
tain air  of  respect,  but  as  if  it  were  a  matter  about 
which  they  have  no  particular  concern  ;  —  as  if  it 
were  not  their  business  to  determine  for  themselves 
what  is  true  and  what  is  false  concerning  it.  They 
appear  to  look  on  the  whole  subject  as  one  to  be 
left  to  divines  and  priests  and  the  Church.  Gross 
ignorance  and  gross  misconceptions  of  Christianity 
consequently  prevail.  Objections,  cavils,  and  sup- 
posed difficulties,  which  would  at  once  vanish  in 
clear  day,  assume  a  portentous  appearance  amid 
the  darkness,  or  the  perplexity  of  false  lights. 
Explanation,  thorough  explanation,  a  readiness  to 
view  the  subject  on  every  side  and  in  all  its  impor- 
tant relations,  a  total  indisposition  to  fall  back  for 
support  on  authority  or  traditionary  opinions  or 
vulgar  prejudices,  and  a  freedom  from  all  those 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.         7 

motives  of  fear  or  interest  which  may  bias  the  mind 
to  countenance  the  errors  of  any  party,  are  espe- 
cial requisites  at  the  present  day  in  a  defender  and 
expositor  of  Christianity.  He  should  be 

"  veritatem  quserere  pertinax, 

sollicitus  parum 

Utcunque  stet  commune  vulgi 
Arbitrium  et  popularis  error." 

The  character  of  our  age  is  such  that  we  are 
particularly  called  upon  to  consider  the  opinions 
of  those  by  whom  Christianity  is  rejected,  —  and 
by  whom,  as  we  shall  hereafter  see,  all  religion  is 
rejected, — and  to  examine  the  foundations  of  their 
system  of  unbelief. 

The  number  of  modern  German  theologians  who 
have  more  or  less  formally  attacked  the  credibility 
of  the  Gospels  is  great.  But  it  may  not  be  very 
difficult  to  give  a  general  view  sufficiently  com- 
prehensive and  satisfactory  of  the  modes  of  reason- 
ing which  they  have  pursued,  and  of  the  objections 
which  they  have  brought  forward.  The  theolo- 
gians of  Germany  are  much  in  the  habit  of  writ- 
ing in  chorus,  if  I  may  so  express  myself,  and  of 
repeating  each  other  with  inconsiderable  varia- 
tions. No  other  among  those  who  have  contro- 
verted the  truth  of  our  religion  has  become  by 


8          INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

many  degrees  so  conspicuous  as  Strauss,  of  whose 
principal  work,  "  The  Life  of  Jesus,"  it  is  my  in- 
tention to  take  particular  notice.  He  may  fairly 
be  regarded  as  a  representative  of  the  class.  The 
pre-eminence  in  notoriety  which  that  work  has  at- 
tained above  the  similar  productions  of  his  coun- 
trymen, its  wide  circulation  in  the  original  and  in 
translations,  and  the  number  of  those  who  have 
viewed  it,  either  with  fear  or  with  favor,  as  a  for- 
midable attack  on  Christianity,  give  it  a  clear  title 
to  particular  attention.  But  besides  this,  it  con- 
tains a  copious  collection  from  various  modern 
authors,  the  countrymen  of  Strauss,  of  what  has 
been  regarded  as  most  forcible  in  their  objections 
to  the  credibility  of  the  Gospels ;  and  the  collec- 
tion is  connected  throughout  with  a  theory  con- 
cerning the  origin  of  Christianity,  not,  indeed, 
original  with  the  author,  but  which  is  more  fully 
developed  by  him  than  by  any  one  of  his  prede- 
cessors. 

But,  though  I  thus  profess  my  intention  of  tak- 
ing especial  notice  of  the  work  of  Strauss,  yet  no 
reader  needs  to  apprehend  that  his  attention  will 
be  diverted  from  the  great  topics  before  us  to  the 
consideration  of  the  errors,  misapprehensions,  and 
incapacity  of  a  particular  writer.  A  reasoner  with 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.         9 

the  sole  purpose  of  establishing  the  truth  will  not 
take  advantage  of  any  want  of  ability  in  his  oppo- 
nent. He  may  incidentally  point  it  out  as  illus- 
trating the  character  and  qualifications  of  those  by 
whom  what  he  believes  to  be  the  truth  is  assailed ; 
but  he  will  not  dwell  on  the  mistakes  or  folly  of 
any  writer  whom  he  may  think  it  worth  while  to 
controvert,  as  if  these  aiforded  evidence  that  the 
propositions  maintained  by  that  writer  must  be 
false.  One  advantage,  however,  and  it  is  some- 
times a  great  advantage,  he  who  is  maintaining  the 
truth  may  derive  from  the  work  of  an  opponent. 
To  arguments  the  most  decisive,  other  representa- 
tions may  be  opposed.  A  writer  may  be  fully 
aware  that,  however  conclusive  his  reasoning  may 
be  to  his  own  mind,  there  are  other  minds  differ- 
ently constituted  and  informed  that  entertain,  dif- 
ferent views.  These  views,  it  is  true,  he  may  pre- 
sent in  his  own  language.  He  may  put  words 
into  the  mouth  of  a  supposed  objector.  But  in 
doing  so  there  is  danger  that  he  may  seem  to  be 
trifling  with  his  readers,  —  to  be  making  another 
say  what  no  intelligent  man  would  say.  But  if 
he  produce  what  has  actually  been  said,  and  what 
many  have  thought  to  be  forcibly  said,  he  is  re- 
lieved at  once  from  the  suspicion  of  contending 
with  a  man  of  straw  fabricated  by  himself. 


10         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

IN  treating  of  the  evidence  which  the  Gospels 
themselves  afford  of  their  genuineness  and  of  their 
authenticity,  it  is  not  worth  while  to  attempt  to 
make  an  artificial  separation  between  those  argu- 
ments which  bear  more  directly  on  the  one  sub- 
ject, and  those  which  relate  more  particularly  to 
the  other.  They  run  into  each  other  and  are  inti 
mately  blended  together ;  and  the  ultimate  pur- 
pose of  both  is  the  same. 

If  the  Gospels  be  authentic,  that  is,  if  their 
contents  be  true,  they  are  genuine  works  of  their 
supposed  authors ;  for,  if  true,  they  were  written  by 
early  and  well-informed  disciples  of  Christ ;  and 
it  would  be  idle  to  ascribe  them  to  any  other  dis- 
ciples of  Christ  than  those  to  whom  the  Christian 
world  has  assigned  them  from  the  beginning.  On 
the  other  hand,  if  their  genuineness  be  proved, 
their  truth  is  established  ;  for  it  would  be  folly  to 
suppose  that  disciples  of  Jesus,  in  the  midst  of  un- 
believers and  enemies,  whom  it  was  evidently  their 
purpose  to  impress  with  the  noblest  truths  and 
sentiments  of  religion  and  morality,  put  forth  pre- 
tended histories  of  their  master  full  of  marvellous 
fables,  and  obtained  reception  for  these  fables, 
though  they  and  their  contemporaries  knew  them 
to  be  false.  In  dealing  with  the  historical  evi- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  11 

dence  for  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  we  may 
prove  that  they  were  written  by  those  to  whom 
they  have  been  ascribed,  without,  at  the  same  time, 
bringing  any  direct  proof  of  their  credibility,  though 
the  step  from  one  conclusion  to  the  other  is,  as  we 
have  just  seen,  unavoidable.  But,  in  arguing  from 
their  contents  to  prove  their  genuineness,  it  is  not 
practicable,  and  if  it  were  practicable  it  would 
not  be  desirable,  to  separate  the  arguments  for 
their  genuineness  from  those  which  establish  the 
great  truth  that  they  contain  the  authentic  history 
of  a  miraculous  revelation  of  God. 

The  evidence  for  this  truth,  as  we  might  expect 
in  regard  to  a  fact  so  momentous,  presents  itself 
on  every  side.  It  is  constantly  opening  before  us 
as  we  pursue  new  paths  of  investigation.  It  may 
be  hidden  from  view  by  the  interposition  of  false 
notions  of  Christianity  and  of  the  Gospels.  Con- 
ceptions so  erroneous  may  exist  concerning  our  re- 
ligion and  the  books  containing  its  history,  that 
the  internal  evidences  of  its  truth  may  not  apply 
to  the  false  representations  given  of  the  one  or  the 
other.  There  may  be  no  coherence  between  them. 
But  God,  in  manifesting  himself  to  the  world 
through  Christ,  has  not  left  us  without  abundant 
witness  that  he  has  so  manifested  himself.  The 


12         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

evidences  which  Christianity  affords  of  its  mirac- 
ulous origin,  the  proofs  which  the  "new  creation," 
as  it  is  called  by  St.  Paul,  gives  of  its  author,  are 
in  number  and  variety  like  those  which  the  natu- 
ral creation  affords  of  the  power,  wisdom,  and 
goodness  of  God.  Both  may  be  clouded  over  by 
human  errors.  Both  require  the  exercise  of  our 
reason,  that  we  may  discern  them  in  their  extent 
and  clearness.  Both  may  be  disregarded.  But 
they  exist. 

WHAT  may  properly  be  called  the  internal  evi- 
dences of  the  truth  of  our  religion,  or,  in  other 
words,  of  the  truth  of  the  history  contained  in  the 
Gospels,  are  so  numerous,  so  diverse  in  their  char- 
acter, and  appear  from  so  many  different  points  of 
view,  that  the  subject  is  not  to  be  exhausted  by 
any  one  writer  or  in  any  one  treatise.  In  explain- 
ing the  historical  evidence  for  the  genuineness  of 
the  Gospels,  I  have  been  naturally  led  to  point 
out  some  of  the  more  important  internal  proofs  of 
their  authenticity.  In  the  present  work  I  shall 
bring  forward  others.  But  a  main  design  of  this 
work  is  to  remove  the  errors  and  objections  which 
may  counteract  the  proper  influence  of  these  proofs, 
and  tHus  to  leave  the  mind  open  to  their  reception, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  13 

from  whatever  source  they  may  be  derived,  or  in 
whatever  form  they  may  present  themselves. 

IN  pursuing  this  design,  we  must  begin  with 
entirely  setting  aside  one  essential  misapprehen- 
sion concerning  the  intrinsic  character  of  the  Gos- 
pels. The  traditionary  doctrine  has  been,  that  they 
are  not,  properly  speaking,  the  works  of  their  re- 
puted authors,  but  works  written  by  the  inspira- 
tion of  God,  or  under  his  immediate  suggestion 
and  superintendence.  On  the  one  hand,  this  doc- 
trine is  an  insuperable  obstacle  to  all  just  appre- 
ciation of  that  vast  amount  of  evidence  for  their 
truth  which  the  Gospels  carry  with  them  when 
properly  regarded  and  understood;  and,  on  the 
other,  it  is  from  this  doctrine  that  the  objections 
with  which  their  genuineness  and  authenticity 
have  been  assailed  derive  their  chief  strength. 

It  having  been  assumed  that  they  are  infallible 
books,  free  from  the  imperfections  and  mistakes 
that  belong  to  the  works  of  merely  human  narra- 
tors, and  especially  to  those  of  writers  so  uned- 
ucated as  the  Evangelists,  when  such  imperfec- 
tions and  mistakes  have  been  discovered  in  them, 
the  unbeliever  has  thought  himself  to  have  found 
an  argument  against  the  reality  of  God's  revela- 


14  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

tion  by  Christ,  while  in  fact  he  had  found  only  an 
argument  against  a  false  doctrine. 


*  It  is  true,  that  in  a  book  not  expressly  intended 
for  the  confutation  of  merely  popular  errors,  —  in 
a  work  of  reasoning  addressed  to  intelligent  men, 
who  may  be  supposed  to  be  so  far  interested  in  its 
subjects  as  to  have  exercised  some  serious  thought 
upon  them,  and  to  have  made  themselves  in  some 
degree  acquainted  with  the  facts  necessary  to  be 
attended  to  in  order  to  form  a  correct  judgment 
concerning  them,  —  it  may  seem  incongruous  and 
out  of  place  to  enter  into  a  confutation  of  this 
doctrine  as  applied  to  the  Gospels.  But  the  as- 
sumption that  it  is  necessary  for  a  defender  of  their 
trustworthiness  to  defend  their  infallibility  has 
afforded  the  main  opportunity  for  the  most  plausi- 
ble attacks  which  have  been  made  on  their  credit  ; 
while,  at  the  same  time,  many  Christians  have 


*  [The  preceding  "Introduction"  was  left  unfinished  by  the  author. 
The  following  fragment  found  among  his  papers,  relating  to  the  topic 
with  which  it  breaks  off,  was  apparently  to  have  been  used  as  a  por- 
tion of  the  intended  conclusion.  It  is  therefore  here  printed,  but  it 
should  be  understood  that  it  did  not  receive  the  author's  final  re- 
vision.] 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  15 

joined  with  the  adversaries  of  our  religion  in  in- 
sisting on  the  truth  of  this  assumption,  and  in  re- 
garding the  doctrine  that  the  Gospels  are  properly 
to  be  referred  to  God  as  their  author,  and  are  con- 
sequently free  from  error,  as  essential  to  Christian- 
ity, and  the  main  point  to  be  defended  in  a  con- 
troversy concerning  its  truth.  The  objections  to 
it  —  all  which  it  is  worth  while  to  urge,  since,  if 
these  are  not  considered  as  decisive,  all  others 
must  be  unavailing  —  may  be  stated  in  a  few 
words.  It  supposes  a  miracle  of  which  no  proof 
can  be  afforded  through  the  evidence  of  ocular 
witnesses.  It  is  a  miracle  the  first  step  in  the 
proof  of  which  is  wanting;  for  the  first  step  in 
proving .  such  a  miracle  is  to  show  that  the  sup- 
posed subject  of  it  claims  to  write  by  the  author- 
ity and  under  the  guidance  of  God;  and  the  Evan- 
gelists put  forward  no  such  pretension.  There 
can,  it  would  seem,  be  no  rational  ground  for  as- 
cribing inspiration  to  a  writer  who  himself  does 
not  claim  to  be  inspired.  But  though  the  Evan- 
gelists do  not  claim  it  for  themselves,  it  may  be 
said  that  they  are  affirmed  to  have  been  inspired 
by  an  authority  that  cannot  be  questioned;  for 
St.  Paul  says,  "  All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspira- 
tion of  God."  (2  Timothy  iii.  16.)  This  passage 


16        INTEENAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

is  the  main  argument  for  the  supposition ;  and  it 
affords  a  very  striking  example  of  the  manner  in 
which  a  few  misunderstood  but  easily  remembered 
words  are  often  detached  from  the  Bible  and  em- 
ployed in  support  of  irrational  doctrines,  in  oppo- 
sition to  all  else  that  may  be  learned  from  it,  and 
to  the  plainest  dictates  of  common  sense.  In  re- 
gard to  those  words,  it  is  unnecessary  to  urge  the 
considerations,  that,  before  an  argument  in  proof 
of  a  miracle  can  be  founded  upon  them,  it  must 
be  proved  that  St.  Paul  was  inspired  to  write 
them ;  and  that  it  must  be  further  proved  that  the 
Gospels  were  in  existence  when  he  wrote  them, 
which  is  very  doubtful ;  or  even  the  consideration, 
that,  were  they  in  existence,  he  could  not  have 
had  them  in  mind,  since  it  is  clear  from  the  con- 
text that  he  referred  only  to  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament.  The  words  have  their  whole  force, 
great  as  it  has  been  upon  the  minds  of  English 
readers,  only  from  the  improper  use  of  the  word 
"inspiration"  in  our  common  English  version,  and 
the  consequent  false  meaning  which  has  been  put 
upon  them.  Their  true  meaning  may  be  thus 
expressed :  "  The  spirit  of  God  is  breathed  into 
every  book  "  ;  that  is,  of  the  Old  Testament ;  and 
the  only  purpose  of  the  Apostle  was  to  assert  gen- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  17 

erally,  what  no  Christian  will  deny,  that  a  relig- 
ious spirit  pervades  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Hence  they  are,  and  were  especially  to  the 
early  converts  to  our  faith,  "  profitable,"  &c.  I 
say  especially  to  the  early  converts,  because  at  the 
time  when  St.  Paul  wrote  there  was  no  collection 
of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  there  was  no 
Christian  literature,  and  certainly  nothing  in 
heathen  literature,  supposing  them  to  have  had 
any  familiarity  with  it,  which  could  supply  the 
place  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  as  a 
source  of  religious  instruction  and  religious  feel- 
ings. 


But  the  Gospels  themselves  afford  evidence  the 
most  decisive  of  the  question  whether  they  bear 
the  stamp  of  God's  infallibility,  or  the  impress  of 
human  minds. 


UNIVERSITY 


18         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 


CHAPTER    I. 

GENEEAL   EEMAEKS  ON   STEAUSS'S   THEOEY    OF '  THE  OEIGIN 
OF  CHEISTIANITY. 

SINCE  the  first  edition  of  my  work  on  the  Gen- 
uineness :  of  >  the  Gospels ,  appeared,  an  English 
translation  of  Strauss's  ".  Life  of  Jesus  "  has  been 
published.  It  i  is:  remarkable,  Considering  the  gen- 
eral coincidence  between  the  subject  of  his  work 
and  my  own,  that,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  in- 
cidental observations,  I  have  hitherto  found  no 
occasion,  nor  :  even '-  any  suitable  opportunity,  to 
take  notice  of -it. '  It  contains  nothing  which  in- 
validates the  statement  of  facts' from  which  I  have 
reasoned,  or  touches  upon  the  arguments  which  I 
have  drawn  from  those  facts. 

The  theory  of  Strauss  respecting  the  origin  of 
Christianity,  which  I  have  formerly  very  briefly 
explained,*  is  essentially  coincident  with  specula- 
tions advanced  by  Volney  in  a  once  famous  book, 

*  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  2d  Ed.,  Vol.  IH. 
p.  lix.    Compare  Vol.  I.  pp.  118  -  120. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        19 

"  The  Ruins."  He  says  :  "  Conformably  to  the 
calculations  received  by  the  Jews,  nearly  six  thou- 
sand years  had  passed  since  the  imagined  creation 
of  the  world."  That  time  had  been  fixed  for  a 
renovation  of  the  world  by  a  great  deliverer  of 
whom  there  was  a  general  expectation  throughout 
Asia.  "  This  coincidence  produced  a  fermentation 
in  men's  minds.  Nothing  was  thought  of  but  an 
approaching  end.  Men  interrogated  the  hiero- 
phants  and  their  mystic  books,  which  assigned 
various  periods  for  it.  They  expected  the  Re- 
storer. In  consequence  of  talking  about  him, 
some  one  said  that  he  had  seen  him ;  or  we  may 
suppose  that  some  enthusiast  believed  himself 
to  be  that  personage,  and  collected  partisans. 
These  partisans,  deprived  of  their  chief  by  an  inci- 
dent, true  without  doubt,  but  which  passed  in  ob- 
scurity, gave  occasion,  by  the  stories  which  they 
told,  to  a  rumor  which  was  gradually  organized 
into  history.  On  this  foundation,  all  the  circum- 
stances of  the  mythological  traditions  were  very 
soon  arranged,  and  the  result  was  an  authentic 
and  complete  system,  which  it  was  not  permitted 
to  doubt."* 

*  "  Or,  dans  les  calculs  admis  par  les  Juifs,  on  commen9ait  a  comp- 


20        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

Conformably  to   what  has    been  before   said, 
Strauss  supposes  that  there  was  among  the  Jews 

ter  pr£s  de  six  mille  ans  depuis  la  creation  (fictive)  du  monde.  Cette 
coincidence  produisit  de  la  fermentation  dans  les  esprits.  On  ne 
s'occupa  plus  que  d'une  fin  prochaine  ;  on  interrogea  les  hierophantes 
et  leur  livres  mystiques,  qui  en  assignment  divers  termes ;  on  attendit 
le  riparateur  ;  a  force  d'en  parler,  quelqu'un  dit  1'avoir  vu,  ou  menu; 
un  individu  exalte  crut  1'etre  et  se  fit  des  partisans,  lesquels,  prives 
de  leur  chef  par  un  incident  vrai  sans  doute,  mais  passe*  obscurement, 
donnerent  lieu,  par  leurs  recits,  a  une  rumeur  graduellement  orga 
nisee  en  histoire :  sur  ce  premier  canevas  etabli,  toutes  les  circonstances 
des  traditions  mythologiques  vinrent  bientot  se  placer,  et  il  en  re"sulta 
un  systeme  authentique  et  complet,  dont  il  ne  fut  plus  permis  de  dou- 
ter."  — Les  Euines,  (Bruxelles,  1830,)  p.  224. 

This  theory  of  Volney  is  immediately  followed  in  his  work  by 
another  irreconcilable  with  it,  borrowed  from  his  contemporary,  Du- 
puis,  the  author  of  the  "  Origine  de  tous  les  Cultes."  According  to  the 
latter  theory,  Christ  is  an  allegorical  personage,  and  Christianity  is  an 
allegory  representing  certain  celestial  phenomena.  In  this  allegory 
Christ  is  the  sun.  Yolney  (pp.  227,  290)  derives  the  name  Christ 
from  the  Hebrew  word  D1TJ,  Jieres  or  cheres,  which  signifies  the  sun, 
and  the  name  Jesus  from  Yes,  "which  is  formed  by  the  union  of  three 
letters,  the  numerical  value  of  which  is  608,  one  of  the  solar  periods." 
It  would  be  hard  to  find  in  the  book  of  Volney  himself  anything 
more  astonishing  than  the  marvellous  absurdity  of  these  etymologies. 
Certainly  it  would  be  very  difficult  to  find  anything  like  them  in  the 
works  of  a  writer  having  a  reputation  for  common  learning  and  com- 
mon honesty.  It  deserves  notice,  that  when  their  absurdity  was  com- 
mented on  by  Dr.  Priestley,  though  Volney  replied  to  his  work,  he 
did  not  undertake  to  make  any  defence  on  this  topic.  See  Priestley's 
"  Observations  on  the  Increase  of  Infidelity,"  (1797,)  p.  118,  seqq. ; 
and  his  "  Letters  to  Mr.  Volney,"  (1797,)  p.  23. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        21 

an  eager  expectation  of  their  Messiah.  Jesus,  at 
least  during  a  part  of  his  ministry,  regarded  him- 
self as  the  Messiah,  as  "  the  greatest  and  last  of 
the  prophetic  race."  He  was  consequently  so  re- 
garded by  his  followers.  The  expectation  which 
the  Jews  entertained  of  their  Messiah  was  definite, 
and  "  characterized  by  many  important  particu- 
lars." They  had  formed  many  imaginations  con- 
cerning him  connected  with  allegorical  and  typical 
misinterpretations  of  the  Old  Testament;  and,  after 
the  appearance  of  Jesus,  there  were  some  among 
the  Jews  who  converted  their  imaginations  of  what 
the  Messiah  was  to  be  into  fictions  of  what  Jesus 
had  been,  and  embodied  those  fictions  in  a  history 
of  his  ministry. 

I  have  said,  "  some  among  the  Jews."  This 
mode  of  expression  is  not  adopted  by  Strauss  him- 
self, but  it  is  necessarily  implied ;  for  the  follow- 
ers of  Jesus  were  a  small  minority  of  the  Jewish 
nation.  The  Jewish  people  generally  rejected 
him,  as  not  their  Messiah,  and  their  leaders  perse- 
cuted and  crucified  him  as  a  religious  impostor 
and  blasphemer.  Nor,  according  to  Strauss,  were 
the  supposed  fictions  concerning  him  propagated 
by  his  immediate  disciples,  who  had  witnessed  his 
deeds  .and  listened  to  his  words,  his  Apostles  and 


22         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

their  associates  ;  nor,  consequently,  by  those  who 
knew  and  held  the  truth  concerning  him  as  taught 
by  them.  To  affirm  that  they  were  propagated  by 
the  Apostles  and  their  associates  would  be  to 
maintain  what  the  most  reckless  infidelity  has 
shrunk  from  directly  asserting,  namely,  that  the 
received  history  of  Jesus  is  a  collection  of 'enor- 
mous falsehoods,  fabricated  by  his  immediate  dis- 
ciples, and  preached  by  them  with  ineffable  effron- 
tery in  -  the  very  face  of  those  who'  knew  them'  to 
be  false.  From  this  simple  solution  of  the  origin 
of  our  religion,  the  "  mythical ','  theory  of  Strauss 
essentially  differs;  for,  though:  he  does  not  define 
the  sense  in  which  he,  uses  the  term  "  my  thus"  it  is 
fundamental  in  his  theory  that  my thi,  and  partic- 
ularly the  mythi  or  fables  concerning  Jesus,  are 
not  generally  intentional  falsehoods.  It  is  'this 
characteristic  alone  which  distinguishes  it '  from 
the  more :  obvious  and  bald  solution  of  the  origin 
of  Christianity  which  has  been  adverted  to. 

Thus -he  quotes,  as ,  essentially  expressing  his 
own  opinions  concerning-  the  origin  and  nature  of 
the  mythi  in .-  the  -  history  of  Christ,  what  is  said 
by  Otfried  Miiller  concerning  the  origin  and  na- 
ture of  the- mythi  or  mythological  fables  of  the 
ancient  Heathens.  The  words  in  parentheses  in 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  23 

the  following  extract  are  inserted  by  Strauss  to 
accommodate  the  language  of  Miiller  to  his  pur- 
pose. 

Mtiller  contends  that  the  mythological  fables  of 
the  ancients  were  not  the  fictions  of  one  individual 
or  of  many,  for  the  purpose  of  deception.  "It  is 
impossible,"  he  says,  "to  prove  that  such  a  caste  of 
deceivers  existed  in  ancient  Greece  (or  Palestine)  ; 
on  the  contrary,  this  skilful  system  of  deception, 
be  it  gross  or  refined,  selfish  or  philanthropic,  if 
we  are  not  misled  by  the  impression  we  have  re- 
ceived from  the  earliest  productions  of  the  Gre- 
cian (or  Christian)  mind,  is  little  suited  to  the 
noble  simplicity  of  those  times.  Hence  an  inven- 
tor of  the  mythus,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word, 
is  inconceivable.  This  reasoning  brings  us  to  the 
conclusion,  that  the  idea  of  a  deliberate  and  in- 
tentional fabrication,  in  which  the  author  clothes 
that  which  he  knows  to  be  false  in  the  appearance 
of  truth,  must  be  entirely  set  aside  as  insufficient 
to  account  for  the  origin  of  the  mythus."  * 

The  following  passage  may  further  illustrate 
the  fundamental  idea  of  Strauss,  that  the  mythi 
or  fables  contained  in  the  Gospels  were  not  fic- 

*  Strauss's  Life  of  Jesus,  (English  Translation,)  Vol.  I.  p.  76. 


24         INTEKNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

tions  invented  by  adherents  of  Jesus  for  the  pur- 
pose of  deception. 

"  Perhaps  it  may  be  admitted  that  there  is  a 
possibility  of  unconscious  fiction,  even  when  an 
individual  author  is  assigned  to  it,  provided  that 
the  mythical  consists  only  in  the  filling  up  and 
adorning  some  historical  event  with  imaginary 
circumstances ;  but  that  where  the  whole  story  is 
invented,  and  not  any  historical  nucleus  is  to 
be  found,  this  unconscious  fiction  is  impossible. 
Whatever  view  may  be  taken  of  the  heathen  my- 
thology, it  is  easy  to  show,  with  regard  to  the  New 
Testament,  that  there  was  the  greatest  antecedent 
probability  of  this  very  kind  of  fiction  having 
arisen  respecting  Jesus,  without  any  fraudulent  in- 
tention." * 

But  if  the  Gospels  were  composed  by  the  au- 
thors to  whom  they  are  ascribed,  by  Apostles  and 
by  those  who  knew  the  truth  respecting  the  his- 
tory of  Jesus  from  the  communications  of  the 
Apostles,  that  is,  if  the  positions  maintained  in 
"  The  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gos- 
pels "  be  correct,  the  "  mythical "  theory  falls 
at  once  to  the  ground.  We  are  compelled  to 

*  Strauss,  I.  80. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  25 

recur  to  the  supposition  of  intentional  falsehood 
on  the  broadest  scale,  if  those  who  knew  the  truth 
respecting  Jesus  were  the  authors  of  the  fables 
concerning  him.  Accordingly,  Strauss  says:  "The 
most  ancient  testimonies  tell  us,  firstly,  that  an 
Apostle,  or  some  other  person  who  had  been  ac- 
quainted with  an  Apostle,  wrote  a  Gospel  history ; 
but  not  whether  it  was  identical  with  that  which 
afterwards  came  to  be  circulated  in  the  Church 
under  his  name ;  secondly,  that  writings  similar  to 
our  Gospels  were  in  existence  ;  but  not  that  they 
were  ascribed  with  certainty  to  any  one  individual 
Apostle  or  companion  of  an  Apostle.  Such  is  the 
uncertainty  of  these  accounts,  which  after  all  do 
not  reach  further  back  than  the  third  or  fourth 
decade  of  the  second  century.  According  to  all 
the  rules  of  probability,  the  Apostles  were  all  dead 
before  the  close  of  the  first  century ;  not  except- 
ing John,  who  is  said  to  have  lived  till  A.  D.  100; 
concerning  whose  age  and  death,  however,  many 
fables  were  early  invented.  What  an  ample  scope 
for  attributing  to  the  Apostles  manuscripts  they 
never  wrote  !  "  * 

Thus,  according  to  Strauss,  "  the  external  testi- 


*  Strauss,  I.  62. 
3 


26         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

mony  respecting  the  composition  of  our  Gospels 
is  far  from  forcing  upon  us  the  conclusion,  that 
they  proceeded  from  eyewitnesses  or  well-informed 
contemporaries'"  ;  *  and  the  internal  grounds  of 
evidence  determine  that  such  was  not  their  origin. 

The  following  passage  may  throw  further  light 
on  the  conceptions  of  Strauss  respecting  the  essen- 
tial position  of  his  theory,  namely,  that  the  Apos- 
tles and  their  associates,  the  first  followers  of  our 
Lord  and  the  witnesses  of  his  ministry,  are  not  re- 
sponsible for  the  fables  contained  in  the  Gospels. 

"In  the  first  place,"  he  says,  "the  fact  that 
many  such  compilations"  (as  the  Gospels)  "of  nar- 
ratives concerning  the  life  of  Jesus  were  already 
in  general  circulation  during  the  lifetime  of  the 
Apostles,  and  more  especially  that  any  one  of  our 
Gospels  was  known  to  an  Apostle  and  acknowl- 
edged by  him,  can  never  be  proved.  With  respect 
to  isolated  anecdotes,  it  is  only  necessary  to  form 
an  accurate  conception  of  Palestine,  and  of  the 
real  position  of  the  eyewitnesses  referred  to,  in 
order  to  understand  that  the  origination  of  legends, 
even  at  so  early  a  period,  is  by  no  means  incom- 
prehensible. Who  informs  us  that  they  must  ne- 

*  Strauss,  I.  65. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        27 

cessarily  have  taken  root  in  that  particular  district 
of  Palestine  where  Jesus  tarried  longest,  and  where 
his  actual  history  was  well  known  1  And  with 
respect  to  eyewitnesses,  if  by  these  we  are  to  un- 
derstand the  Apostles,  it  is  to  ascribe  to  them  ab- 
solute ubiquity,  to  represent  them  as  present  here 
and  there,  weeding  out  all  the  unhistorical  legends 
concerning  Jesus,  in  whatever  places  they  had 
chanced  to  spring  up  and  flourish."  * 

According  to  Strauss,  however,  the  greater  part 
of  those  fictions  concerning  Jesus  which  are  em- 
bodied in  the  Gospels,  became  connected  with  his 
history  during  the  period  of  about  thirty  years 
which  intervened  between  his  death  and  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,t  that  is,  during  the  period 
throughout  which  many  of  his  Apostles  and  their 
associates,  —  the  first  preachers  of  our  religion,  — 
and  the  great  body  of  those  instructed  by  them, 
were  living.  These  fictions  did  not  proceed  from, 
nor  were  they  countenanced  by  them,  nor  were 
they  received  as  true  by  those  who  relied  on  their 
authority.  How,  notwithstanding,  they  obtained 
such  currency  as  almost  immediately  to  obscure 
and  obliterate  his  true  history,  is  to  be  thus  ex- 
plained. 

*  Strauss,  I.  63,  64.  f  Ibid.,  I  84. 


I 

28  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

The  age,  it  is  true,  was  "an  historical  age " 
(by  which  term  Strauss,  I  suppose,  must  be  un- 
derstood as  meaning  an  age  in  which  facts  would 
be  recorded,  and  mythological  fables  would  not 
find  ready  currency) ;  but  "  the  pure  historic  idea 
was  never  developed  among  the  Hebrews."  "  In- 
deed, no  just  notion  of  the  true  nature  of  history 
is  possible,  without  a  perception  of  the  inviolabil- 
ity of  the  chain  of  finite  causes,  and  of  the  impos- 
sibility of  miracles.  This  perception,  which  is 
wanting  to  so  many  minds  of  our  own  day,  was 
still  more  deficient  in  Palestine,  and  indeed  through- 
out the  Roman  empire.  And  to  a  mind  still  open 
to  the  reception  of  the  marvellous,  if  it  be  once 
carried  away  by  the  tide  of  religious  enthusiasm, 
all  things  will  appear  credible;  and  should  this  en- 
thusiasm lay  hold  of  a  yet  wider  circle,  it  will 
awaken  a  new  creative  vigor,  even  in  a  decayed 
people.  To  account  for  such  an  enthusiasm,  it  is 
by  no  means  necessary  to  presuppose  the  Gospel 
miracles  as  the  existing  cause.  This  may  be  found 
in  the  known  religious  dearth  of  that  period,  a 
dearth  so  great  that  the  cravings  of  the  mind  after 
some  religious  belief  excited  a  relish  for  the  most 
extravagant  forms  of  worship ;  secondly,  in  the 
deep  religious  satisfaction  which  was  afforded  by 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        29 

the  belief  in  the  resurrection  of  the  deceased  Mes- 
siah, and  by  the  essential  principles  of  the  doctrine 
of  Jesus."  * 

The  theory  of  Strauss  necessarily  supposes,  that 
Jesus  was  a  very  conspicuous  individual,  who  acted 
strongly  on  the  minds  of  men.  Before  this  theory 
can  be  received,  it  becomes  requisite  to  explain 
the  very  rapid  growth  of  those  most  extraordinary 
fictions  concerning  him,  which  sprung  up  and 
flourished  while  very  many  of  his  contemporaries 
were  still  living ;  especially  as  by  a  great  majority 
of  those  contemporaries,  his  enemies,  they  would 
be  at  once  indignantly  spurned  and  trampled 
under  foot,  as  being  what  they  were,  monstrous 
falsehoods  ;  while  by  another  portion,  the  first  ad- 
herents of  Jesus,  and  the  original  witnesses  of  his 
ministry,  their  growth,  to  say  the  least,  was  not 
fostered,  —  they  did  not  rest  on  their  testimony. 
Strauss  has  shown  himself  sensible  that  an  expla- 
nation of  this  phenomenon  is  requisite ;  and  the 
solution  which  he  gives  of  the  sudden  develop- 
ment of  such  an  array  of  fables  concerning  Jesus 
may  be  found  in  the  following  passage.  It  may 
be  readily  understood,  if  we  bear  in  mind  what  has 

*  Strauss,  I.  64,  65. 
3* 


30  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

been  before  stated,  that  according  to  his  theory 
the  Jews  had  entertained  many  imaginations  con- 
cerning their  expected  Messiah  ;  and  that  the  pro- 
cess in  forming  the  history  of  Jesus  which  has 
come  down  to  us  consisted  in  converting  these 
imaginations  of  what  was  to  be  into  fables  con- 
cerning Jesus. 

He  says :   "A  frequently  raised  objection   re- 
mains,   the  objection,  namely,  that  the  space 

of  about  thirty  years,  from  the  death  of  Jesus  to 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  during  which  the 
greater  part  of  the  narratives  must  have  been 
formed,  —  or  even  the  interval  extending  to  the 
beginning  of  the  second  century,  the  most  distant 
period  which  can  be  allowed  for  the  origin  of  even 
the  latest  of  these  Gospel  narratives,  and  for  the 
written  composition  of  our  Gospels, — is  much  too 
short  to  admit  of  the  rise  of  so  rich  a  collection  of 
mythi.  But,  as  we  have  shown,  the  greater  part 
of  these  mythi  did  not  arise  during  that  period, 
for  their  first  foundation  was  laid  in  the  legends 
of  the  Old  Testament,  before  and  after  the  Baby- 
lonish exile;  and  the  transference  of  these  legends, 
•with  suitable  modifications,  to  the  expected  Mes- 
siah, was  made  in  the  course  of  the  centuries  which 
elapsed  between  that  exile  and  the  time  of  Jesus. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  31 

So  that,  for  the  period  between  the  formation  of 
the  first  Christian  community  and  the  writing  of 
the  Gospels,  there  remains  to  be  effected  only  the 
transference  of  Messianic  legends,  almost  all  ready 
formed,  to  Jesus,  with  some  alterations  to  adapt 
them  to  Christian  opinions,  and  to  the  individual 
character  and  circumstances  of  Jesus :  only  a  very 
small  proportion  of  mythi  having  to  be  formed 
entirely  new." 

This  is  the  only  explanation  he  affords. 

IT  appears,  then,  according  to  Strauss,  that  some 
time  during  the  thirty  or  forty  years  after  the  death 
of  our  Lord,  the  small  body  of  his  followers  among 
the  Jews  was  divided  into  two  parties  of  very  dif- 
ferent characters.  One  was  composed  of  his  per- 
sonal friends  and  followers,  the  Apostles  and  their 
associates,  who  knew  his  true  history  and  doc- 
trines, and  who  did  not  propagate  those  falsehoods 
concerning  him  on  which  the  religion  of  Chris- 
tians is  founded.  The  other  was  composed  of  per- 
sons who  did  propagate  those  falsehoods.  These 
had  their  origin,  as  Strauss  suggests,  in  districts 
of  Palestine  where  Jesus  did  not  tarry  long,  and- 

*  Strauss,  I.  84,  85. 


32        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

where  his  actual  history  was  not  well  known ; 
and  it  would,  he  says,  be  ascribing  absolute  ubiqui- 
ty to  the  Apostles  to  suppose  them  to  have  been 
capable  of  being  present  here  and  there  to  weed 
out  all  the  unhistorical  legends  concerning  him  in 
whatever  places  they  had  chanced  to  spring  up 
and  flourish.*  Those  who  propagated  these  fic- 
tions concerning  him  had  no  intention  of  deceiv- 
ing. They  were  unconscious  of  falsehood ;  they 
believed  that  what  they  related  had  actually  taken 
place.t  They  had  had  so  little  acquaintance  with 
Jesus,  or  with  the  eyewitnesses  of  his  ministry, 
that  they  did  not  know  that  all  which  they  affirmed 
concerning  him  was  untrue.  On  the  contrary, 
they  were  persuaded  that  it  was  true. 

But  though,  as  Strauss  suggests,  their  fictions 
may  not  originally  "  have  taken  root  in  that  par- 
ticular district  of  Palestine  where  Jesus  tarried 
longest,"  t  yet,  in  order  to  make  converts  to  the 
belief  of  them,  it  was  necessary  that  they  should 
be  preached  in  parts  of  Palestine  where  our  Lord 
had  been  well  known,  and  where  there  could  be 
no  ignorance  respecting  the  essential  facts  in  his 
ministry.  Here,  on  the  one  hand,  they  would  be 

*  See  the  quotation  from  Strauss  given  before,  p.  27. 

f  See  before,  p.  22,  seqq.  J  See  before,  p.  27. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  33 

indignantly  and  vehemently  contradicted  by  the 
great  body  of  the  unbelieving  Jews,  and,  on  the 
other,  they  would  be  denied  and  discountenanced 
by  the  true  followers  of  Christ.  The  innocent  im- 
postors, who,  in  their  ignorance,  propagated  uncon- 
sciously such  enormous  falsehoods  concerning  him, 
must  have  been  surprised  to  find  all  those  ac- 
quainted with  the  facts  in  his  history,  whether 
friends  or  enemies,  utterly  confounded,  to  say  the 
least,  by  their  marvellous  stories.  One  might 
think  that  their  own  confidence  would  have  been 
shaken  by  the  direct  and  authoritative  evidence 
which  they  must  have  encountered,  on  every  side, 
of  the  falsehood  of  their  narrations.  It  might 
seem,  moreover,  that  it  would  be  impossible  under 
such  circumstances  to  procure  converts  to  the  be- 
lief of  them.  But  such  was  not  the  case.  Their 
own  confidence  was  not  shaken  ;  they  persisted  in 
promulgating  their  stories,  and  they  triumphed 
signally.  They  are  the  true  authors  of  Christian- 
ity. It  is  to  them  that  we  are  indebted  for  the 
Gospels.  Their  fictions  have  supplanted  the  real 
history  of  Christ,  the  original  testimony  of  eye- 
witnesses, and  have  become  the  foundation  of 
Christian  faith.  Nor  is  this  all.  Keeping  them- 
selves out  of  view,  they  have  had  complete  sue- 


34  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

cess  in  putting  their  stories  before  the  world  as 
resting  on  the  authority  of  the  Apostles  and  their 
associates,  —  in  making  them  responsible  for  the 
marvellous  tales.  The  whole  Christian  world  has 
believed  that  these  stories  proceeded  from  Apos- 
tles and  their  associates.  But  it  was  not  so.  They 
proceeded  from  another  party  among  the  followers 
of  Christ,  a  party  that  does  not  appear  in  history, 
the  existence  of  which  is  irreconcilable  with  all 
remaining  records  and  memorials  of  the  times 
when  it  is  supposed  to  have  nourished,  utterly 
irreconcilable  with  all  probability,  and  which, 
therefore,  was  unknown  to  the  world  before  its 
discovery  by  Strauss. 

It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  distinguish- 
ing characteristic  of  the  theory  of  Strauss,  the 
"  mythical "  theory  of  the  origin  of  Christianity, 
consists  in  the  supposition  that  the  mythi  or  fic- 
tions in  the  history  of  Jesus  were  not  intentional 
fabrications  for  the  purpose  of  deception,  but  that 
they  sprung  up,  as  it  were,  spontaneously ;  those 
among  whom  they  originated  and  by  whom  they 
were  propagated  being  unconscious  of  falsehood. 
If  intentional  fictions,  it  is  conceded  that  they  are 
not  mythi.  This,  at  least,  is  the  general  view  to 
be  taken  of  them.  The  history  of  Jesus  now  ex- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  35 

tant,  which  is  little  more  than  a  mass  of  fictions, 
attributing  to  him  throughout  a  supernatural  char- 
acter and  divine  authority,  could  not  have  pro- 
ceeded from  those  who  were  personally  conversant 
with  him,  and  knew  the  real  events  of  his  life. 
This  fact  is  fully  recognized  by  Strauss,  though 
not  clearly  apprehended  by  him  in  its  necessary 
relations.  His  reader  should  keep  it  in  mind. 
We  must  not  suffer  ourselves  to  vacillate  between 
two  theories  wholly  inconsistent  with  each  other. 
The  Apostles  and  their  associates  were,  or  were 
not,  the  most  shameless  of  impostors.  According 
to  Strauss,  they  were  not  impostors.  It  follows  that 
the  history  of  our  Lord  which  the  Christian  world 
has  received  was  not  derived  from  them,  though  it 
grew  to  its  present  form  principally  while  the 
most,  or  many,  of  them  were  living.  It  proceeded, 
therefore,  from  other  individuals,  the  true  origina- 
tors of  Christianity,  —  anonymous  individuals,  of 
whom  history  has  preserved  no  record,  and  who 
must  have  taught  under  the  circumstances  which 
have  been  described.* 

*  "Narrationes  in  Evangeliis  traditas,  quas  rerum  vere  gestarum 
esse  persuadere  nrihi  non  potueram,  mythorum  in  modum,  qui  inter 
antiquas  gentes  inveniuntur,  aut  in  ore  populi  a  minutis  initiis  coa- 
luisse  et  eundo  crevisse,  aut  a  singulis,  sed  qui  vere  ita  evenisse  super- 


36        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

WE  may  next  observe,  that,  however  difficult 
was  the  task  of  these  teachers  of  our  present  re- 
ligion in  persuading  the  contemporaries  and  coun 
trymen  of  an  'individual  so  conspicuous  as  our 
Lord  must  have  been  to  give  credit  to  a  history 
of  him  full  of  marvels  that  were  utterly  devoid  of 
truth,  yet  this  was  not  the  sole,  nor  the  greatest, 
difficulty  which  they  are  supposed  to  have  over- 
come. 

Their  teaching  consisted,  as  we  are  informed  by 
Strauss,  in  identifying  the  history  of  Jesus  with 
the  anticipations  of  the  Jews  concerning  their  ex- 
pected Messiah.  The  mythi  respecting  this  imagi- 
nary personage  were  ready  made  for  their  use, 
and  they  had  only  to  turn  them  into  historical  fic- 
tions and  accommodate  them  to  Jesus. 

stitiose  in  animum  induxerant,  fictas  esse  existlmaveram.  Quod  ut 
sufficit  explicandis  plerisque  eorum,  quae  dubitationem  moventia  tribus 
prioribus  Evangeliis  continentur :  ita  quart!  Evangelii  auctorem  ad 
tuendas  et  illustrandas  sententias  suas  baud  raro  meras  fabulas  scien- 
tem  confinxisse,  a  Baurio,  theologo  Tubingensi  doctisslmo,  nuper  ita 
demonstratum  est,  ut  critici  me  judicii  rigori  religiosius  quam  verius 
temperasse  intelligam.  Dumque  prima  a  Christo  secula  accuratius 
perscrutantur,  partes  partiumque  certamina,  quibus  nova  ecclesia 
commovebatur,  in  apricum  proferunt,  narrationum  baud  paucarum, 
quas  fabulas  esse  ego  bene  quidem  perspexeram,  sed  unde  ortsB  essent 
demonstrare  non  valueram,  veram  in  illis  primsB  ecclesise  motibus 
originem  detegere  theologis  Tubingensibus  contigit."  —  Strauss,  Vol. 
I.  p.  vii. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        37 

But  every  one  knows  what  were  the  popular 
expectations  of  the  Jews  respecting  their  coming 
Messiah.  Of  him,  David,  the  greatest  of  their 
kings,  the  founder  of  their  monarchy,  was  in  their 
view  the  especial  type ;  though  in  all  by  which 
the  favor  of  God  had  distinguished  David,  the 
Messiah  was  to  be  far  more  highly  distinguished. 
He,  too,  was  to  be  a  monarch,  the  restorer  of  the 
kingdom  of  Israel,  a  warrior,  a  conqueror,  the  de- 
liverer and  exalter  of  his  people.  Establishing 
the  seat  of  his  empire  at  Jerusalem,  he  was 'to 
found  a  kingdom  extending  over  the  world  and 
enduring  to  the  consummation  of  all  things,  over 
which  he  was  to  rule  without  a  successor.  This 
was  the  outline  of  their  expectations,  which,  doubt- 
less, before  the  coming  of  our  Lord,  was  filled  up, 
as  it  has  been  since,  with  many  particular  imagi- 
nations, corresponding  to  its  general  character. 

But,  according  to  Strauss,  it  was  the  purpose  of 
those  who  propagated  the  fabulous  history  of  Je- 
sus to  evince  that  he  was  the  Messiah  through  the 
correspondence  of  its  fictions  with  the  previous 
expectations  of  the  Jews  concerning  the  Messiah. 
This  history  actually  shows  one  striking  point  of 
resemblance,  in  representing  Jesus  as  the  last  great 
messenger  of  God  to  the  Jewish  nation,  endued 


38         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

with  miraculous  powers.  But  the  whole  repre- 
sentation of  the  purpose  and  effects  of  his  mission, 
of  his  personal  character,  of  his  humble  condition 
in  this  world,  of  his  determined  repression  of  all 
hope  of  worldly  aggrandizement  for  himself,  his 
followers,  or  his  countrymen,  of  his  annunciation 
to  his  immediate  disciples,  that  they  must  submit 
to  poverty  and  suffering,  and  prepare  themselves 
for  the  last  outrage  of  persecution,  together  with 
the  account  of  the  apparent  triumph  of  his  ene- 
mies and  of  his  cruel  death,  —  this  representa- 
tion, if  it  were  a  fiction,  might  seem  to  have  been 
devised  in  direct  opposition  to  the  expectations  of 
the  Jews  respecting  their  Messiah. 

But  it  may  be  said,  that  the  facts  to  which  I 
have  referred  were  so  notorious,  that  no  other  ac- 
count could  be  given  by  the  honest  impostors, 
who,  unconscious  of  falsehood,  propagated  the 
stories  of  his  miracles.  Certainly  these  facts  were 
so  notorious,  that  no  other  account  could  be  given 
but  that  which  we  have  received.  But  such  being 
the  case,  it  follows,  that  no  attempt  could  be  more 
hopeless  or  more  foolish,  than  an  attempt  to  per- 
suade the  Jews  that  the  life  and  the  death,  the 
character,  acts,  and  teachings  of  Jesus,  correspond- 
ed to  their  previous  expectations  of  the  Messiah. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        39 

So  far,  indeed,  from  their  finding  any  such  corre- 
spondence, we  know  that,  during  his  ministry  and 
after  his  death,  he  was  rejected  by  a  very  great 
majority  of  the  nation,  as  disappointing  all  their 
hopes  from  a  Messiah,  and  exasperating  their 
strongest  prejudices. 

I  have  elsewhere  spoken  of  the  theory  of  Strauss 
as  an  outrage  upon  common  sense.  If  the  pre- 
ceding account  of  it  be  correct,  and  no  one,  I  trust, 
will  pretend  that  it  is  not,  the  language  which  I 
have  used  cannot  be  objected  to.  But,  as  may 
abundantly  appear  from  the  evidence  afforded  by 
Strauss's  work  alone,  he  has  many  speculatists 
among  his  own  countrymen  to  keep  him  in  coun- 
tenance. 

BUT  we  have  as  yet  viewed  this  theory  only  un- 
der one  aspect;  namely,  in  its  relation  to  the  Jew- 
ish nation.  We  will  consider  it  in  some  other 
very  important  relations,  in  which  the  author  has 
not  presented  it,  and  in  regard  to  which  he  has, 
of  course,  given  no  explanations. 

Christianity  had  its  origin  among  the  Jews,  but 
it  is  not  through  them  that  it  has  been  transmitted 
to  us.  From  them  it  was  communicated  to  the 
Gentiles,  the  Heathens,  our  predecessors,  from 


40        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

whom  we  have  received  it.  '  But  between  the 
Heathen  world  and  the  Jewish  people  there  had 
been  previously  a  wide  separation.  This  separa- 
tion continued  between  the  Jewish  Christians  gen- 
erally and  the  Gentile  Christians.  With  the  ex- 
ception of  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  the  former  did 
not  use  the  Gospels  received  by  the  latter,  —  Gos- 
pels which  attained  universal  authority  among  the 
Gentile  Christians.  These  books  were  received  by 
them,  I  do  not  here  say,  as  authentic  histories  of 
Jesus,  but  as  authentic  histories  of  a  miraculous 
revelation  from  the  true  God,  a  God  before  un- 
known to  the  generality  among  them,  —  the  God 
whom  St.  Paul  announced  as  such  even  at  Athens. 
From  whom,  then,  did  the  Heathens  receive 
their  knowledge  of  Christianity  and  of  the  Gos- 
pels ]  The  theory  of  Strauss  admits  but  of  one 
answer.  According  to  this  theory,  they  must  have 
received  it,  not  from  the  main  body  of  the  Jewish 
Christians,  but  from  those  few  mistaken  men  among 
them  who,  having  little  or  no  acquaintance  with 
Jesus,  propagated,  unconscious  of  falsehood,  those 
mythi  concerning  him  with  which  the  Gospels  are 
filled,  and  who  thus  established  in  the  world  not 
merely  a  fabulous  history  of  him,  the  professed 
Messiah,  of  whom  they  knew  nothing  correctly, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  41 

but  likewise  a  new  religion,  embracing  the  no- 
blest principles  of  action,  founded  upon  faith  in  one 
whose  real  history  they  had  obliterated  or  ren- 
dered doubtful,  and  whose  character  they  had  es- 
sentially misrepresented.  This  is  the  only  answer 
which  the  theory  of  Strauss  admits.  But  the  only 
answer  admitted  by  authentic  history  and  indis- 
putable facts  is,  that  the  Heathens  were  instructed 
in  Christianity  by  the  immediate  followers  and 
companions  of  our  Lord  and  by  their  associates, — 
by  those  who  were  perfectly  aware  -whether  their 
teaching  was  or  was  not  true  ;  that  they  received 
our  religion  from  Barnabas  and  Paul  and  Luke, 
from  Peter  and  Mark,  from  the  Apostle  John,  who 
resided  so  long  among  them,  and  from  others  asso- 
ciated with  these  early  teachers.  Above  all,  no 
degree  of  folly,  I  think,  certainly  none  to  which  a 
rational  person  can  be  required  to  give  heed,  will 
lead  any  one  to  pretend  expressly  that  there  is  any 
evidence,  or  any  ground  whatever  for  imagining, 

that  the  Gospel  was  preached   to   the  Heathen 

• 

world  in  two  different  forms ;  in  one  form  by  half- 
crazy  fanatics,  who  filled  the  history  of  our  Lord 
with  stories  of  fictitious  miracles,  and  in  another 
by  his  immediate  followers  and  friends,  who  told 
the  truth  concerning  him,  whatever  that  was. 


42         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

But  turning  from  unquestionable  truths,  we  will 
enter  the  region  of  mere  hypothesis.  We  will 
clear  the  ground,  as  far  as  possible,  of  those  facts 
that  stand  in  our  way.  The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul 
we  will  regard  as  forgeries,  and  the  whole  history 
of  the  propagation  of  Christianity  which  may  be 
gathered  from  the  New  Testament  as  a  fabrica- 
tion. We  may  thus  find  room  for  those  conclu- 
sions that  necessarily  result  from  the  theory  of 
Strauss  concerning  the  establishment  of  Christian- 
ity in  the  heathen  world. 

Though  it  is  implied  by  him,  that  we  have  no 
evidence  of  the  reception  of  our  present  Gospels 
before  the  last  half  of  the  second  century,  yet  it 
is  acknowledged,  or  rather  maintained,  by  him,  as 
well  as  by  the  other  infidel  theologians  of  Ger- 
many, that  histories  of  the  same  essential  charac- 
ter existed  at  a  much  earlier  period.  It  is  not 
pretended  that  any  history  of  our  Lord  essen- 
tially at  variance  with  the  Gospels,  any  history  in 
which  he  was  not  represented  as  a  teacher  from 
God,  whose  mission  was  attested  by  miraculous 
displays  of  God's  power,  was  ever  known  to  the 
Gentile  Christians. 

These  Christians,  therefore,  received  their  in- 
struction in  Christianity  from  the  fanatical  and 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        43 

ignorant  portion  of  Christ's  disciples.  Every  one 
knows  what  these  teachers  effected.  Let  us  con- 
sider their  means  and  the  obstacles  which  they 
had  to  encounter. 

They  were  men  very  deficient  in  good  sense. 
They  had  taken  110  pains  to  inform  themselves 
correctly  concerning  the  character,  acts,  and  teach- 
ing of  him  whose  disciples  they  professed  to  be, 
and  whom  they  were  so  zealous  in  exhorting  oth- 
ers to  obey.  They  had,  on  the  contrary,  fallen 
into  the  grossest  mistakes  concerning  them.  God 
did  not  "  bear  them  witness  with  signs  and  won- 
ders and  divers  miracles,  and  gifts  of  the  Holy 
Spirit."  The  pretence  that  he  did  so  is  merely 
one  of  the  fables  which  are  put  forward  through- 
out the  New  Testament.  It  was  not  only  mor- 
ally, but  physically,  impossible  that  they  should 
produce  any  miraculous  evidence  of  the  truth  of 
their  fictions.  Nor  were  they  distinguished  for 
eloquence  or  ability  of  any  sort,  since,  though 
they  effected  such  an  astonishing  work,  history 
has  not  even  preserved  their  names,  but  has  falsely 
substituted  for  them  those  of  other  individuals, 
Apostles  of  Christ  and  the  associates  of  Apos- 
tles. 

Such  were  the  character  and  the  facilities  for 


44        INTEKNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

accomplishing  their  purpose,  possessed  by  these 
zealous  missionaries  of  falsehood.  What  obsta- 
cles, then,  had  they  to  encounter  1 

According  to  Strauss,  their  main  purpose  in 
their  mythical  history  of  Christ,  which  we  now 
find  in  the  Gospels,  was  to  evince  that  a  Messiah 
(named  Jesus)  had  appeared  among  the  Jews. 
This  was  the  story  which  they  propagated  in  the 
heathen  world. 

But  the  heathen  world  would  have  regarded 
only  with  indifference  or  ridicule  such  a  story 
from  such  preachers,  —  a  story,  that  a  Messiah 
had  appeared  among  the  Jews,  a  people  towards 
whom  the  prevalent  feelings  of  the  Heathens  had 
been  those  of  dislike  and  contempt ;  and  in  whose 
supposed  good  or  ill  fortune  in  the  advent  of  their 
Messiah,  it  must  have  been  very  hard  to  persuade 
them  that  they  had  any  concern.  Admitting, 
however,  that  it  were  possible  to  excite  their  at- 
tention to  the  subject,  with  what  ineffable  scorn 
must  they  have  regarded  the  sort  of  evidence  laid 
before  them  !  How  would  they  have  listened  to 
proofs  founded  on  a  pretended  correspondence  be- 
tween a  body  of  incredible  fictions  and  certain 
passages  of  a  book  called  the  Old  Testament,  — 
a  book  for  which  they  had  no  respect,  which  very 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        45 

many  of  them  probably  had  never  heard  of,  and 
which  it  may  be  safely  presumed  no  one  of  them 
had  read,  —  which  passages  were  represented  to 
them  as  expressing  typically  or  mystically  what 
the  Jews  had  expected  concerning  the  Messiah  ? 
With  how  much  patience  would  they  have  lis- 
tened to  these  Jewish  proselyting  missionaries 
who  had  come  among  them,  when  these  missiona- 
ries themselves  told  them,  that  the  person  whom 
they  called  on  them  to  receive  as  the  Jewish  Mes- 
siah had  been  rejected  by  his  own  nation  as  an 
impostor  and  blasphemer,  and  had,  in  consequence 
of  his  pretensions,  suffered  a  public  execution  as 
ignominious  as  it  was  cruel  1  What  must  they 
have  thought  of  this  Jewish  Messiah,  the  deliv- 
erer of  his  people,  when  he  was  preached  to  them 
after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  dis- 
persion and  ruin  of  the  Jewish  nation  I  Is  it  pos- 
sible, an  intelligent  reader  may  ask,  that  any  one 
can  have  been  so  bewildered  and  confounded  by 
irreligion  and  mysticism,  as  to  imagine  that  the 
most  astonishing  moral  revolution  in  the  history 
of  mankind,  the  establishment  of  Christianity  in 
the  heathen  world,  was  effected  by  such  agents 
under  such  circumstances  ? 


46         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

IT  is  not  my  intention  to  proceed  at  length 
in  such  an  examination  of  the  theory  of  Strauss. 
Were  it  worth  while  to  exhaust  the  subject,  it  is 
one  which  could  not  easily  be  exhausted.  As  truth 
finds  continual  confirmation  flowing  in  upon  every 
side,  in  proportion  as  the  views  of  those  who  ex- 
amine it  are  more  comprehensive  and  correct,  so 
error  is  continually  encountered  by  new  objec- 
tions, in  proportion  as  it  is  distinctly  contem- 
plated, and  its  necessary  relations  clearly  un- 
derstood. I  shall  therefore  confine  myself  to  a 
very  few  of  the  more  important  aspects  of  that 
theory. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  47 


CHAPTER    II. 

REMAKES  ON  OTHER  THEORIES. 

IF  the  Gospels  be  genuine,  if  the  essential  facts 
which  I  have  stated  in  "  The  Evidences  of  the 
Genuineness  of  the  Gospels  "  be  not  erroneously 
stated,  which  no  one,  I  believe,  will  pretend,  and 
if  the  reasoning  upon  them  be  not  fallacious,  of 
which  every  one  may  judge  for  himself,  the  theory 
of  Strauss  is  wholly  excluded ;  there  is  no  ground 
on  which  it  can  stand.  It  becomes  evident  that 
it  is  only  one  of  those  many  theories  which  hang 
in  the  cloudy  region  of  German  speculation,  — 
oijT6  yfjs  ovre  ovpavov  aTTTo/jieva,  —  unconnected  with 
anything  on  earth  or  in  heaven.  If  the  Gospels 
were  written  by  Apostles  and  by  those  who  re- 
ceived their  accounts  immediately  from  Apostles, 
the  mythical  theory  of  their  having  proceeded 
from  men  who  innocently  and  unconsciously  origi- 
nated and  propagated  marvellous  stories  respect- 
ing our  Lord  must  vanish  at  once  into  air.  Noth- 
ing remains  for  the  disbeliever  in  the  historical 


48         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

facts  concerning  the  origin  of  our  religion,  but  to 
fall  back  on  the  forlorn  hypothesis,  that  the  his- 
tory of  Jesus  is  throughout  fictitious,  and  that, 
of  all  intentional  falsifiers,  the  Apostles  were  the 
most  shameless  and  the  most  successful,  —  shame- 
less and  successful  in  so  marvellous  a  manner, 
that  no  account  whatever  can  be  given  of  it. 

If,  then,  the  views  which  have  been  taken  of 
the  theory  of  Strauss  be  correct,  nothing  can  be 
added,  which  will  exhibit  more  clearly  its  inco- 
herent and  dreamlike  character,  or  its  utter  insuffi- 
ciency to  explain  either  the  origin  of  Christianity, 
or  any  one  essential  fact  connected  with  the  origin 
of  Christianity.  I  pass  over,  therefore,  many 
other  considerations  respecting  it,  which  to  my 
own  mind  seem  equally  decisive  as  to  its  charac- 
ter, and  will  only  make  a  few  remarks  on  this  in 
common  with  other  theories  to  account  for  the 
establishment  of  Christianity  which  have  been  ad- 
vanced by  such  as  refuse  to  admit  its  miraculous 
origin.  Those  theories  are  very  few.  To  object, 
not  to  explain,  has  been  the  common  work  of  un- 
believers. 

PREVIOUSLY  to  the  theory  of  Strauss,  that  which 
was  prevalent  in  Germany  supposed,  that  the  facts 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        49 

recorded  in  the  Gospels,  with  the  exception  of 
those  of  a  miraculous  character,  were  in  the  main 
historically  true,  and  that,  in  regard  to  the  ac- 
counts of  miracles  which  they  contain,  those  like- 
wise were  founded  on  certain  facts  which  actually 
took  place,  but  facts  in  the  common  course  of 
nature,  to  which  a  miraculous  character  was  given 
only  through  the  misapprehension  of  those  by 
whom  they  were  witnessed.  But  it  did  not  at- 
tempt to  explain  how  Christianity  was  established 
in  the  world  through  this  misapprehension  of  some 
ignorant  Jews,  whose  folly  was  regarded  with 
contempt  and  indignation  by  a  very  great  majority 
of  their  countrymen.  This  theory  has  passed,  or 
is  rapidly  passing,  into  a  matter  of  history,  and 
there  it  will  stand,  as  a  melancholy  proof  of  the 
intellectual  and  religious  state  of  men  in  a  large 
portion  of  civilized  Europe  during  the  latter  part 
of  the  last  and  the  beginning  of  the  present 
century. 

In  regard  to  these  two  theories,  and  the  spec- 
ulations, generally,  of  infidel  writers  respecting 
the  origin  of  Christianity,  there  are  some  prelim- 
inary considerations  which  are  essential  to  form- 
ing a  correct  judgment  on  the  subject,  but  which 
have  been  greatly  neglected  or  kept  out  of  view. 


50  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

Let  him  who  is  reasoning  against  the  divine  origin 
of  our  religion  fix  any  period  he  may  choose  for 
the  commencement  of  its  authentic  history,  still 
at  this  period  phenomena  present  themselves  of  a 
character  altogether  wonderful  and  unparalleled. 

We  may  take,  for  example,  the  last  quarter  of 
the  second  century,  and  regard  as  fabulous  all  the 
previous  history  of  Christianity.  What,  then,  is 
to  be  found  at  this  period  I 

We  find  the  miraculous  history  of  Jesus,  —  the 
history  of  a  Jew  who  was  represented  to  have 
been  commissioned  by  the  God  of  the  Jews  to 
instruct  and  command  all  men  in  his  name,  —  we 
find  this  history,  as  it  is  recorded  in  the  four  Gos- 
pels, received  with  an  immovable  conviction  of 
its  truth,  by  a  great  number  of  heathen  converts. 
They  were  steady  in  affirming  that  this  history, 
and  the  books  in  which  it  is  contained,  had  been 
received  by  them  from  those  who  had  made  known 
to  them  the  new  religion,  —  from  Apostles  of 
Christ  and  their  associates.  From  whom,  indeed, 
could  they  have  received  the  history  of  Christ's  min- 
istry, the  truth  of  which  they  believed  so  firmly, 
except  from  those  by  whom  Christ  had  been  made 
known  to  them,  and  on  whose  teaching  their  faith 
in  him  rested  ?  Of  the  strength  of  their  belief 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  51 

they  gave  sure  proof  by  the  marvellous  change 
which  it  wrought  in  their  hearts  and  lives,  by  the 
wide  separation  which  it  produced  between  them 
and  the  heathen  world,  by  their  readiness  to 
submit  to  all  the  deprivations  and  evils  which 
it  brought  upon  them;  and  even  when  they 
shrunk  from  torture  and  death,  it  was  not  that 
their  belief  was  shaken,  but  that  their  courage 
failed.  Here  is  one  group  of  remarkable  phe- 
nomena to  be  accounted  for.  Let  us  look  at 
another. 

In  an  age  which  has  afforded  pictures  of  the 
darkest  and  most  revolting  depravity  prevailing 
throughout  the  heathen  world,  in  the  midst  of 
such  men  as  had  furnished  materials  for  the  his- 
tories of  Tacitus  and  Suetonius,  —  histories  from 
which  so  much  more  may  be  inferred  by  a  Chris- 
tian reader  than  is  told  by  the  heathen  writers,  — 
at  a  period  when  pagan  ignorance  and  superstition 
had  become  inflamed  into  persecuting  bigotry,  we 
find  Christianity  in  existence  and  extending  its 
power,  in  opposition  to  the  strong  antipathy  and 
resistance  of  the  evil  by  which  it  was  surrounded. 
To  use  the  words  of  a  Christian  then  living,  Ter- 
tullian,  it  was  "  converting  men  to  the  worship  of 
the  true  God,  causing  them  to  reject  error,  and 


52  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

forming  them  to  righteousness,  chastity,  patience, 
mercy,  innocence."  If  there  be  any  truth  in  any 
religion,  if  there  be  a  God  who  cares  for  men,  if 
men  are  immortal  beings,  if  there  be  any  respon- 
sibility for  our  actions  beyond  this  life,  if  that 
doctrine  be  not  false  which  teaches  us  to  regard 
ourselves  as  spiritual  beings,  and  not  as  perishing 
animals,  if  there  be  anything  ennobling  or  con- 
solatory beyond  what  atheism  may  afford, — what- 
ever can  give  value  to  religion  is  found  in  Chris- 
tianity. And  Christianity  was  existing  in  the 
second  century.  How  is  this  fact  to  be  account- 
ed for? 

Such  is  the  character  of  our  religion,  that  those 
who  have  denied  its  divine  origin  have  generally, 
in  modern  times,  been  disposed  to  pay  it  a  show 
of  reverence,  and,  while  rejecting  its  history  and 
its  authority,  to  belie  its  name  and  assume  it  for 
their  infidel  theories.  Even  Strauss  gives  us  to 
understand,  that  "he  is  filled  with  veneration  for 
every  religion,  and  especially  for  the  substance  of 
the  sublimest  of  all  religions,  the  Christian,  which 
he  perceives  to  be  identical  with  the  deepest  phil- 
osophical truth  "  ;  *  that  is,  with  the  atheistic  phi- 

*  Vol.  m.  p.  397. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  53 

losophy  of  Hegel.  Whatever  inconsistency  or 
folly  there  may  be  in  this  assertion,  I  do  not  sup- 
pose that  it  is  to  he  regarded  as  ironical  mockery. 
His  fellow-laborer,  Baur,  as  I  have  formerly  re- 
marked, insists  on  the  intimate  connection  be- 
tween the  atheistic  philosophy  of  Hegel  and 
Christianity,  so  that  the  former  transfers  to  itself 
the  entire  substance  of  the  latter.*  No  one  will 
so  misunderstand  me  as  to  suppose  that  I  quote 
these  passages  as  deserving  consideration,  regarded 
as  the  testimonies  of  the  individual  writers  to  the 
value  of  Christianity;  for  the  Hegelian  philosophy 
of  these  writers  has  not  even  any  false  semblance 
of  Christianity,  though  it  might  ally  itself  with 
the  religion  of  the  Tartars,  which  teaches  the  in- 
carnation of  the  divinities  in  human  bodies,  that 
is,  in  the  Lamas ;  —  I  only  quote  them  to  show 
that  Christianity,  however  grossly  it  may  have 
been  misunderstood  and  perverted,  however  the 
study  of  its  character  and  its  evidences  may  have 
been  and  is  neglected,  has  yet,  with  the  progress 
of  morals  and  intelligence,  taken  so  strong  a  hold 
on  all  which  is  excellent  in  the  minds  and  hearts 
of  men,  that  its  enemies,  while  assailing  it,  are 

*  See  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  II.  45,  46. 


54         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

obliged,  in  order  to  secure  followers,  to  inscribe 
its  name  on  their  banners. 

BUT  not  only  was  Christianity  in  existence  in 
the  second  century ;  there  is  another  astonishing 
phenomenon  to  be  accounted  for.  It  is  the  con- 
ception of  its  Founder  presented  in  the  Gospels, 
the  view  given  in  them  of  his  character  and  his 
ministry.  It  is  a  conception  to  which  human  his- 
tory or  human  experience  offers  no  parallel  or 
resemblance,  —  one  apparently  surpassing  the 
power  of  any  human  genius  to  have  formed 
from  such  materials  as  the  heathen  world  could 
furnish  him,  from  any  comprehension  of  relig- 
ious truth  he  might  derive  from  it,  or  from  any 
knowledge  or  imagination  it  might  afford  or  sug- 
gest of  the  moral  nature  and  capacities  of  man. 
Yet  this  portraiture  of  an  individual  in  all  its 
supernatural  grandeur  is  found  in  works  which, 
considered  merely  as  literary  compositions,  are 
rude,  imperfect,  fragmentary,  —  in  the  works  of 
men  whom  it  would  be  folly  to  speak  of  as  in- 
spired by  human  genius,  and  to  whom,  if  we  re- 
gard them  as  fanatical  or  false  or  foolish,  we 
can  ascribe  no  comprehensive  and  correct  no- 
tions of  moral  truth,  and  no  sustained  elevation 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  55 

of  moral  sentiment.  It  is  found  in  the  produc- 
tions of  Jews  who  evidently  had  no  superiority 
over  many  of  their  countrymen  through  their 
natural  gifts,  or  through  the  advantages  of  such 
an  education  as  Galilee  or  Judaea  could  furnish  ; 
but  whose  writings,  on  the  contrary,  make  it  ap- 
parent that  they  had  no  command  of  appropriate 
expression  in  any  language,  and  especially  in  the 
foreign  language  of  the  Greeks.  What  is  to  be 
said  respecting  this  wonderful  combination  of  in- 
congruous facts  1 

The  character  of  Jesus,  as  it  appears  in  the 
Gospels,  is  not  that  of  a  truly  wise  and  good 
man,  placed  in  such  circumstances  as  may  occur 
in  the  course  of  God's  ordinary  providence,  ex- 
posed to  severe  trials  in  an  irreligious  age,  yet 
unbroken  and  unshaken  by  evil,  thoroughly  pen- 
etrated and  supported  by  a  sense  of  his  own  im- 
mortality and  of  his  relation  to  God,  and  devoting 
all  the  powers  which  nature  has  given  him  to  the 
service  of  his  fellow-men.  No  human  genius  has 
ever  exhibited,  by  a  series  of  actions  and  words, 
an  imaginary  delineation  of  such  an  individual. 
Nor  is  this  the  character  which  is  presented  to  us 
with  so  much  distinctness  in  the  Gospels ;  but 
one  which  it  must  have  been  far  more  difficult 


56         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

to  portray  before  its  actual  appearance  on  earth. 
Even  should  we  connect  with  the  conception  just 
presented  the  further  trait,  that  the  individual 
supposed  is,  from  the  impulse  of  his  own  mind,  a 
great  moral  and  religious  reformer,  strenuously 
laboring  to  raise  others  to  the  same  elevation  with 
himself,  we  should  not  embrace  in  it  the  distinc- 
tive characteristics  by  which  Jesus  Christ  was 
separated  from  all  other  men.  How,  then,  is  he 
represented  in  the  Gospels  ? 

In  the  Gospels,  in  these  rude  works  of  unlet- 
tered Jews,  we  find  an  account  of  the  actions  and 
words  of  one  who  is  represented  as  having  been 
the  immediate  minister  of  God,  associated  with 
him  as  no  other  finite  being  within  our  knowl- 
edge ever  was,  speaking  to  mankind  in  his  name, 
and  certified  to  men  as  his  representative  by  ex- 
traordinary manifestations  of  God's  power,  alto- 
gether different  from  that  divine  energy  on  which 
the  regular  course  of  the  physical  universe  de- 
pends. To  this  fundamental  conception  the  ac- 
count given  of  him  fully  corresponds.  He  satis- 
fies the  highest  imaginations  that  we  can  form  of 
such  a  teacher.  He  lives  only  for  God  and  for 
man.  All  selfish  purposes  and  passions  and  fears 
are  put  aside  by  him.  He  does  not  falter  in  his 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        57 

course,  through  any  human  weakness.  The  boldest 
assumptions  of  authority  and  of  the  most  intimate 
connection  with  God,  are  so  accordant  with  the 
whole  representation  of  him,  that  we  read  them 
without  a  thought  of  their  utter  and  shocking 
incongruity  supposing  him  not  to  be  the  delegate 
and  representative  of  God.  —  "  No  one  knows  the 
Father  but  the  Son,  and  he  to  whom  it  is  the  will 
of  the  Son  to  reveal  him."  —  "  He  who  has  seen 
me  has  seen  the  Father."  —  "  The  words  which  I 
speak  are  not  mine,  but  the  Father's  who  sent  me." 
—  "I  and  my  Father  are  one,"  or,  as  we  might 
express  it,  " are  the  same."  —  "I  am  the  resurrec- 
tion and  eternal  life."  —  "  It  is  the  will  of  Him 
who  sent  me,  that  every  one  who  puts  his  trust 
in  the  Son  should  have  eternal  life."  —  "Who- 
ever obeys  my  teaching  will  never  see  death."  — 
"  All  power  is  given  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth." 
The  power  of  the  Omnipotent  will  support  that 
cause  for  which  he  has  sent  me,  the  cause  of  truth 
and  righteousness. 

These  declarations  are  uttered  with  the  perfect 
calmness  of  un  doubting  superiority.  Whether  the 
conception  set  before  us  be  real  or  fictitious,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  about  the  truth  of  the  words, 
"  Never  did  man  speak  like  this  man." 


58  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

This,  then,  is  the  presentation  of  a  character  of 
inappreciable  grandeur.  But  there  is  another 
aspect  under  which  Jesus  appears  in  the  Gospels, 
wholly  contrary  to  all  vulgar  notions  of  grandeur. 
In  this  aspect  there  is  nothing  answering  to  any 
previous  imaginations  which  most  of  us,  probahly 
all  of  us,  might  form  concerning  the  appearance 
in  this  world  of  a  messenger  from  God.  He 
who  claimed  to  speak  in  the  name  of  God  was  a 
poor  Jew  of  Galilee.  His  connections  were  all  in 
the  humbler  classes  of  society.  He  was  uneducat- 
ed. "  Whence,"  asked  the  Jews,  "  has  this  man 
his  learning,  having  never  been  instructed  ? "  He 
was  regarded  with  scorn  as  well  as  with  fear  by 
the  powerful  and  rich  among  his  countrymen.  He 
was  scourged  by  the  order  of  a  Roman  governor. 
He  was  exposed  to  the  insults  of  Roman  soldiers. 
He  suffered,  by  a  public  execution,  that  terrible 
death  of  agony  and  infamy,  which  was  ordinarily 
inflicted  only  on  the  most  odious  criminals,  or 
the  most  despised  captives  and  unpitied  slaves. 

Thus  is  the  delegate  of  God,  he  who  was  entitled 
to  be  called  the  Son  of  God,  brought  before  our 
eyes  in  the  Gospels.  Were  we  to  form  a  previous 
conception  of  the  coming  of  a  messenger  from  God 
to  men,  we  might  imagine  him  an  angel  descend- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  59 

ing  in  glory  from  the  visible  heavens,  or  a  Messiah 
coming  no  one  knew  whence,  a  monarch,  perhaps, 
ruling  with  unresisted  wisdom  and  benevolence, 
and  establishing  throughout  his  kingdom  the  laws 
of  God,  or  a  prophet,  impressing  all  around  him 
with  supernatural  awe,  and  listened  to  only  to  be 
obeyed.  Certainly  we  should  free  our  conception 
from  all  that  might  seem  degrading  in  the  eyes  of 
men,  and  embody  in  it  all  that  we  might  think 
likely  to  command  admiration  and  homage. 

But  when  we  turn  from  our  imaginations  to  the 
realities  presented  in  the  Gospels,  we  perceive  that 
in  their  exhibition  of  the  office,  character,  and  life 
of  Jesus,  the  parts  which  separately  viewed  may 
seem  so  discordant  blend  themselves  into  one  har- 
monious whole.  The  dark  cloud  is  a  part  of  the 
magnificent  spectacle  as  essential  as  the  flood  of 
glory  which  pours  over  it.  The  Saviour  of  men 
came  to  teach  us  that  all  worldly  distinctions  are  as 
nothing,  compared  with  those  which  concern  our 
spiritual  nature  and  our  immortal  being ;  —  and 
how  could  he  have  taught  this,  if  he  had  not  him- 
self trodden  them  under  foot  I  He  came  to  teach 
that  men  are  estimated  by  God  very  differently  from 
the  manner  in  which  they  had  estimated  and  do 
still  ordinarily  estimate  each  other ;  —  that,  in  the 


60        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

burning  light  of  eternal  truth  and  justice,  all  that 
is  accidental  to  character,  all  that  imposes  on  hu- 
man weakness,  disappears ;  and  nothing  remains  as 
an  object  of  Gtod's  approbation  but  essential,  inde- 
structible virtue.  He  came  to  teach  us  the  vanity 
of  all  merely  human  glory,  and  this  lesson  he 
could  not  have  given,  if  he  had  been  invested  with 
the  splendors  of  earth,  or  with  more  magnificent 
splendors  from  heaven,  that  he  might  overpower 
the  imaginations  of  men.  He  came  to  teach  us 
not  by  words  alone,  but  by  embodying  his  teach- 
ing in  his  life,  that  no  sufferings  should  cause  us 
to  turn  aside  from  duty.  He  came  to  form  men  by 
the  most  effectual,  the  only  effectual  means,  —  by 
his  own  example,  —  to  the  practice  of  the  hardest 
and  the  highest  virtues,  those  virtues  which  can 
be  called  into  action  only  by  severe  trials.  How 
could  this  have  been  done  by  such  a  messenger 
from  God  as  we  might,  in  our  folly,  imagine  as 
suitable  to  the  grandeur  of  the  mission'?  He 
could,  indeed,  have  proclaimed  to  us,  that,  when 
duty  requires  it,  we  must  submit  to  any  depriva- 
tion, to  pain  and  death,  and  even  be  ready  to  bear 
our  cross  to  the  place  of  our  execution.  But  what 
would  have  been  the  effect  of  such  a  declaration 
compared  with  that  of  the  words  of  Jesus :  "  Let 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  61 

him  who  would  be  my  follower  renounce  himself, 
and  come  after  me,  bearing  his  cross  "  ?  He  came 
to  bring  hope  to  a  world  full  of  suffering,  in  which 
he  heard  all  around  him  the  wailing  of  wretched- 
ness, as  it  may  everywhere  be  heard  at  the  present 
day  by  him  whose  ears  the  spirit  of  the  religion 
of  Jesus  has  opened  to  its  cry.  He  came  to  men, 
as  they  were  and  as  they  are,  sinning,  sorrow- 
ing, insecure  in  all  that  they  love  on  earth,  often 
oppressed  with  gloom,  often  tried  by  severe  afflic- 
tions, worn  perhaps  by  disease  and  pain,  seeing 
others  perishing  by  the  last  extremities  of  misery 
and  famine,  and  all  fellow-travellers  to  death ;  — 
he  came  to  us  whose  real  life,  at  its  best,  is  often 
so  different  from  its  show  to  the  world ;  and  he 
came  to  bring  strength  and  consolation.  Not  be- 
fore the  throne  of  a  monarch,  nor  in  the  presence 
of  an  angel,  could  we  look  for  sympathy.  It  is 
when  standing  before  the  cross,  while  contem- 
plating the  death  of  the  chosen  of  God,  that  we 
recognize  one  bound  to  us  by  a  common  nature, 
by  community  of  suffering  and  by  mutual  sym- 
pathies, Jesus  the  strengthener,  and  Jesus  the 
fellow-sufferer. 

Looking  back  from  the  cross  of  Jesus  on  his 
preceding  ministry,  what  is  the  image  of  him  which 


62  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

we  receive  from  the  Gospels'?  If  it  have  been 
truly  impressed  on  our  hearts,  we  turn  away  un- 
satisfied from  the  highest  efforts  of  painting  to 
embody  in  his'  lineaments  the  expression  of  his 
character.  Poetry  can  add  nothing  to  our  concep- 
tions. It  may  render  them  more  distinct  and 
vivid,  but  it  will  affect  us  only  in  proportion  as  we 
believe  it  conformed  to  reality.  It  is  to  the  per- 
ception of  essential  reality  that  we  owe  the  thrilling 
sense  of  moral  interest  and  grandeur  produced  by 
the  image  it  has  called  up  of 

"that  calm,  sorrowful,  prophetic  eye 
With  its  dark  depths  of  grief,  love,  majesty ; 
And  the  pale  glory  of  the  brow,  —  a  shrine 
Where  Power  sat  veiled,  yet  shedding  softly  round 
What  told  that  He  could  be  but  for  a  time  uncrowned." 

SUCH  as  we  have  seen  is  the  representation  of 
the  office,  life,  and  character  of  Jesus  contained  in 
the  Gospels.  We  have  been  reasoning,  it  will  be 
remembered,  on  the  supposition  that  all  the  early 
history  of  our  religion  before  its  establishment 
among  the  Gentiles  is  essentially  fabulous.  But 
the  existence  of  this  conception  of  Jesus  in  the 
midst  of  the  pagan  world  remains  to  be  accounted 
for.  A  solution,  likewise,  is  to  be  given  of  the 
other  phenomena  of  which  we  have  taken  so  rapid 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  63 

a  view.  What  explanation  does  infidelity  afford1? 
The  subject  early  exercised  the  minds  of  unbe- 
lievers. During  the  last  two  or  three  centuries 
strong  efforts  have  been  made  to  disprove  the 
miraculous  origin  of  Christianity ;  and  of  late  the 
work  has  been  laboriously  carried  on  by  many 
writers,  some  calling  themselves  Christians,  and 
others  not  assuming  that  name.  What,  then,  are 
the  last  results  ?  What  is  the  theory  now  most 
approved  by  such  writers  concerning  the  origin 
and  establishment  of  Christianity  1 

The  theories  which  have  been  advanced  may  be 
resolved  into  one.  It  is  this,  —  that  the  origin 
and  establishment  of  our  religion,  with  all  the 
phenomena  to  which  our  attention  has  just  been 
directed,  are  the  result  of  the  efforts  of  certain 
Jews,  who,  if  not  fraudulent  fanatics,  grossly  mis- 
conceived, in  some  way  or  other,  the  character  of 
him  whose  history  and  office  they  pretended  to 
make  known ;  that,  by  means  which  are  not  ex- 
plained, they  imposed  their  fabulous  stories,  not 
only  on  some  of  their  own  countrymen,  but  also 
on  the  Heathens,  while  at  the  same  time  they  pre- 
sented to  them  the  highest  conceptions  ever  formed 
of  religion  and  duty ;  and  that  these  stories,  after 
having  been  somewhat  changed  by  tradition,  finally 


64  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

coalesced  into  the  four  Gospels.  Whatever  may 
be  the  first  thoughts  that  such  a  solution  suggests 
to  a  philosopher,  one  of  his  last  reflections  may 
probably  be  on  the  vast  difference  which  it  has 
pleased  God  to  ordain  among  men  in  their  intel- 
lectual capacity  and  their  moral  perceptions  and 
feelings. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        65 


CHAPTER    III. 


EXAMINATION  OF  STRAUSS'  S  TWO  FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCI- 
PLES OF  CRITICISM. 


FROM  these  general  considerations  we  return 
to  our  immediate  task,  a  notice  of  the  work  of 
Strauss.  His  general  theory  concerning  the  origin 
and  establishment  of  Christianity  is  such  as  we 
have  seen.  The  main  body  of  his  work  is  occu- 
pied in  supporting  this  theory  by  an  attack  on  the 
credibility  and  genuineness  of  the  Gospels. 

"  The  sole  purpose  of  the  whole  work  that  fol- 
lows," he  says,  in  his  Introduction,  "  is  to  examine 
the  Gospels  in  detail  in  order  to  determine  on  inter- 
nal grounds  the  credibility  of  their  relations,  and  in 
connection  with  this  the  probability  or  improba- 
bility that  the  Gospels  are  the  work  of  eye- 
witnesses, or,  generally,  of  well-informed  writers."  * 

In  this  examination  the  two  principles  which  he 
lays  down  as  tests,  either  of  which  is  sufficient  to 

*  Leben  Jesu,  I.  64  ;  Engl.  Translation,  I.  57. 


66  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

determine  that  "  an  account  is  not  historical,"  that 
is,  that  it  is  not  to  be  believed,  are  these :  — 

First.  "  An  account  is  not  historical,  when  it  is 
irreconcilable  with  the  known  and  universal  laws 
which  govern  the  course  of  events."  * 

Second.  "  An  account  which  lays  claim  to  any 
historical  value  must  not  be  inconsistent  with 
itself,  nor  contradict  other  accounts."  t 

With  respect  to  the  first  of  these  principles, 
"the  impossibility  of  a  miracle,"  a  conclusion 
which,  according  to  Strauss,  has  been  established 
"  by  a  series  of  the  most  laborious  researches,  con- 
tinued for  centuries,"  it  must  rest  on  the  truth  of 
one  of  two  assertions. 

He  who  affirms  it  must  either  maintain  that 
there  is  no  power  capable  of  producing  other  effects 
than  those  which  men  witness  in  the  regular  course 
of  nature ;  or  he  must  maintain  that,  if  any  being 
possesses  such  power,  we  may  be  fully  assured  that 
he  will  never  exercise  it. 

But  if  there  is  a  being  who  may  properly  be 

*  Leben  Jesu,  1. 100 ;  Engl.  Translation,  I.  87. 

f  As  this  is  so  extraordinary  a  proposition,  it  seems  right  to  give 
the  original :  "  Mit  sich  selbst  und  mit  anderen  Berichten  darf  eine 
Relation  nicht  in  Widerspruch  stehen,  wenn  sie  geschichtliche  Geltung 
ansprechen  will." —  Leben  Jesu,  1. 101 ;  Engl.  Translation,  I.  89. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  67 

called  God,  the  presumption  and  folly  of  either 
proposition  preclude  any  argument  respecting  it 
such  as  might  be  addressed  to  an  intelligent  man. 
If  the  existence  of  such  a  being  as  men  have 
conceived  of  under  the  name  of  God  be  denied, 
the  question  respecting  the  historical  evidences  of 
Christianity  is  shut  out,  and  the  only  question  re- 
maining —  a  question  to  be  first  settled  —  is  about 
the  truth  of  atheism. 

If  the  proposition  be  fully  established,  that  a 
miracle  is  impossible,  it  is  a  futile  labor  to  fill 
many  pages  with  criticisms  intended  to  show  that 
the  narratives  of  the  pretended  miracles  found  in 
the  Gospels  are  incoherent  and  contradictory  to 
one  another.  But  it  is  the  application  of  Strauss's 
second  principle  to  the  criticism  of  the  Gospels 
which  alone  will  interest  an  English  reader,  except 
so  far  as  he  may  be  curious  to  know  the  last  prod- 
ucts of  German  speculation  concerning  religion, 
and  the  last  accepted  theory  of  infidelity. 

This  fundamental  principle  is  enunciated  by  him 
with  his  customary  indefiniteness  and  incorrectness, 
and  the  consequent  absence  of  any  tenable  mean- 
ing. 

"An  account,"  he  says,  "which  lays  claim  to 
any  historical  value,  must  not  contradict  other 


68  INTEENAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

accounts."  It  is  only  after  two  or  three  pages, 
that  he  incidentally  recognizes  the  truth,  that, 
"  when  two  narratives  mutually  exclude  each  other, 
one  only  is  thereby  proved  to  be  unhistorical."  * 

But  this  is  not  the  only  great  oversight  in  the 
position  taken  by  Strauss.  He  speaks  of  one  nar- 
rative as  contradicting  another,  in  a  sense  wholly 
indefinite.  In  what  respects  must  two  narratives 
contradict  each  other,  that  the  credit  of  one  or  both 
may  be  invalidated'?  Certainly  in  the  essential 
points  of  the  narration.  If  they  agree  in  these,  no 
further  agreement  is  ordinarily  to  be  expected. 
Absolute  freedom  from  error  is  not  a  common 
attribute  of  the  most  credible  history,  and  it  would 
be  a  marvel  if  it  were  found  in  four  different  rela- 
tions of  the  same  series  of  transactions.  Two 
professedly  independent  histories  of  the  same  events 
would  present,  I  do  not  say  a  very  suspicious 
character,  but  a  character  wholly  unexampled,  if 
they  agreed  together  throughout,  if  no  real  or 
apparent  discrepances  were  to  be  found  between 
them.  And  in  proportion  as  any  important  fact 
is  confirmed  by  a  greater  number  of  witnesses,  so 
may  we  expect  to  find  more  discrepances  and 

*  Vol.  I.  p.  92,  Engl.  Translation. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        69 

contradictions  in  the  accounts  of  particular  cir- 
cumstances attending  it.  But,  conformably  to  the 
vagueness  of  his  general  proposition,  Strauss, 
throughout  his  criticism  on  the  Gospels,  neglects 
the  distinction  between  essential  contradictions  and 
unimportant  differences,  and  deals  with  the  latter 
as  if  they  were  of  the  same  class  with  the  former. 

Thus,  after  laying  down  his  rule,  he  proceeds 
immediately  to  illustrate  it  in  the  following  man- 
ner:— 

"  The  most  decided  case  falling  under  this  rule, 
amounting  to  a  positive  contradiction,  is  when  one 
account  affirms  what  another  denies.  Thus,  one 
Gospel  [that  of  Matthew]  represents  the  first  ap- 
pearance of  Jesus  in  Galilee  as  subsequent  to  the 
imprisonment  of  John  the  Baptist,  whilst  another 
Gospel  [that  of  John]  remarks,  long  after  Jesus 
had  preached  both  in  Galilee  and  in  Judaea,  that 
'  John  was  not  yet  cast  into  prison.' "  * 

I  believe  that  this  statement  of  Strauss  is  erro- 
neous. But  it  is  not  here  necessary  to  discuss  this 
subject.  Supposing  it  not  to  be  erroneous,  what 
will  follow  ]  It  will  follow  that  one  or  the  other 
Evangelist  had  been  misinformed  as  to  the  time  of 

*  Vol.  I.  p.  89. 


70        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

John's  imprisonment,  or  that,  writing  after  an 
interval  of  probably  more  than  thirty  years,  his 
recollection  of  it  was  incorrect.  It  would  not  fol- 
low that  John'  was  not  imprisoned ;  nor  would 
any  doubt  be  cast  on  the  essential  facts  which  the 
two  Evangelists  relate  concerning  him.  Nor  would 
it  follow  that  either  of  them  was  disqualified,  by 
his  mistake  about  the  precise  time  of  John's  im- 
prisonment, from  being  a  trustworthy  witness  of 
what  he  had  seen  and  heard  as  a  companion  of 
Jesus  during  his  ministry. 

THE  character  of  Strauss's  criticism  on  the  Gos- 
pels, and  of  his  reasoning  upon  them  generally, 
admits  of  being  illustrated  by  applying  it  to  the 
accounts  given  by  different  heathen  authors  of 
almost  any  remarkable  event  which  they  have  re- 
lated in  common.  But  it  is  difficult  to  give  such 
an  illustration ;  because,  on  any  subject  of  profane 
history,  there  is  danger  that  even  a  subdued  copy 
of  his  manner  may  have  an  air  of  burlesque  un- 
suitable to  a  grave  discussion.  Where  the  subject 
offers  nothing  to  pervert  the  action  of  common 
sense,  the  absurdity  of  the  conclusion  to  be  arrived 
at  by  his  mode  of  reasoning  presents  itself  too 
glaringly  at  the  very  commencement  of  the  argu- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  71 

ment.  Nor  would  it  be  tolerable  to  give  at  length 
an  imitation  of  his  prolixity,  and  his  discussion 
of  immaterial  and  irrelevant  topics.  But,  not- 
withstanding these  hindrances,  we  may,  with  the 
omission  of  many  particular  circumstances  and  in  a 
simple  and  imperfect  form,  apply  his  process,  tak- 
ing for  a  subject  the  assassination  of  Caesar.  The 
purpose,  it  is  to  be  conceived,  is  to  show  that  the 
narratives  of  this  event  are  entitled  to  no  historical 
credit,  but,  on  the  contrary,  are  to  be  regarded  as 
different  forms  of  a  "  mythus."  The  account  of  it 
occupies  less  than  twenty  lines  in  the  copy  of 
Suetonius  lying  before  me. 

Suetonius  relates,  that  when  Caesar  had  seated 
himself  in  the  theatre  of  Pompey  where  the  Sen- 
ate was  assembled,  the  conspirators  stood  round 
him.  Cimber  Tullius,  as  he  says,  had  agreed  to 
take  the  lead.  Accordingly,  he  immediately  ap- 
proached Caesar,  as  if  to  make  some  request.  Thus 
the  story  appears  to  have  originally  stood ;  but  in 
the  process  of  tradition  men  were  not  content  with 
so  simple  a  statement.  An  imaginary  subject  was 
invented  for  this  request,  which  in  fact  was  never 
purposed,  namely,  the  recall  of  his  brother  from 
exile.  Appian  represents  the  request  to  have  been 
actually  made  ;  and  Plutarch,  proceeding  still  fur- 


72        INTEENAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ther,  says  that  the  other  conspirators  actually 
joined  in  it.  But  no  reason  -can  be  supposed  why 
they  should  have  thought  it  necessary  to  go  through 
this  preliminary  to  their  bloody  act.  In  contradic- 
tion to  all  these  accounts,  Dion  Cassius  says  that 
"  one  of  the  conspirators,"  (this  indefinite  expres- 
sion, as  we  shall  see,  deserves  to  be  remarked,) 
"  when  it  was  time,  came  to  him  as  if  to  acknowl- 
edge a  favor."  The  account  of  Dion,  taken  alone, 
is  unobjectionable,  except  on  one  ground ;  namely, 
that  it  does  not  appear  how  any  one  could  signify 
by  his  looks  alone  that  he  had  the  purpose  of 
acknowledging  a  favor ;  especially  how  this  could 
be  done  by  a  conspirator  agitated  by  such  feelings 
as  must  naturally  have  accompanied  the  intention 
to  perpetrate  the  murder  of  a  person  like  Csesar, 
whose  presence  struck  awe  into  all  around  him. 

If  these  contradictions  and  improbabilities  cast 
suspicion  on  the  story,  this  suspicion  is  heightened 
by  the  want  of  agreement  among  its  different 
relators  as  to  the  name  of  the  person  who  is  said 
to  have  come  near  to  Csesar.  Dion,  as  we  have 
seen,  does  not  venture  to  give  any  name.  Sueto- 
nius calls  him  Cimber  Tullius,  a  strange  appella- 
tion, as  no  other  example  has  been  produced  of 
Cimber  used  as  a  preenomen.  Seneca,  writing 


v  EE3: 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  73 

about  half  a  century  before  Suetonius,  calls  him 
Tillius,  or  perhaps  Tullius,  Cimber;  thus  chan- 
ging Cimber  into  an  agnomen.  Plutarch,  in  his 
Life  of  Caesar,  calls  him  Metillius  Cimber  ;  but  in 
his  Life  of  Brutus,  Tullius  Cimber.  And,  finally, 
Appian  gives  him  the  name  of  Atilius  Cimber.  It 
is  easy  to  understand  that  the  name  of  an  individ- 
ual so  conspicuous  that  the  conspirators,  men  of 
noble  rank,  had  assigned  to  him  the  lead  in  the 
attack  on  Caesar,  would  not  have  been  so  con- 
founded and  lost. 

In  respect  to  the  question  whether  the  story  is 
to  be  regarded  as  of  any  historical  validity  or  not, 
the  passage  of  Seneca,  in  his  eighty-seventh  Epis- 
tle, which  has  been  already  alluded  to,  is  of  great 
importance.  He  is  discussing  the  question  whether 
a  secret  may  be  intrusted  to  a  man  intemperate  in 
the  use  of  wine.  He  says  :  "  That  assassination 
of  C.  Caesar,  I  mean  him  who,  after  subduing 
Pompey,  ruled  the  Commonwealth,  was  intrusted 
to  Tillius  Cimber  as  well  as  to  C.  Cassius.  Cassius 
through  his  whole  life  drank  only  water.  Tillius 
Cimber  was  excessive  in  the  use  of  wine,  and  a 
brawler."  We  have  no  means  of  ascertaining  the 
precise  date  of  this  Epistle.  But  Seneca  died 
A.  D.  65,  and  Caesar  was  assassinated,  according 


74         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

to  the  common  account,  B.  C.  45.  Seneca  was  a 
philosopher,  and  wrote  for  intelligent  readers. 
But  we  find,  that  within  a  century,  or  perhaps  a 
little  more,  after  the  supposed  assassination  of 
Csesar,  Seneca,  in  speaking  of  it,  was  obliged  to 
explain  whom  he  meant  by  C.  Csesar.  "  I  mean 
him,"  he  says,  "  who,  after  subduing  Pompey,  ruled 
the  Commonwealth."  When  so  little  was  known 
in  the  time  of  Seneca  of  the  history  of  the  Ceesar 
who  was  reported  to  have  been  assassinated  in  the 
midst  of  the  assembled  Senate,  that  intelligent 
readers  could  need  such  a  specification  of  his  per- 
son, it  is  clear  that  little  or  no  reliance  can  be 
placed  on  the  accounts  of  later  writers  than  Seneca, 
(as  are  all  the  historians  who  tell  the  story,)  con- 
cerning the  manner  of  his  death. 

There  is,  moreover,  a  striking  inconsistency  be- 
tween this  passage  of  Seneca  and  what  is  asserted 
by  the  subsequent  narrators  of  the  event.  Accord- 
ing to  them,  Cassius,  and  Brutus  incited  by  Cassius, 
were  leaders  in  the  conspiracy.  Their  accounts 
are  fairly  represented  in  the  famous  play  of  Shake- 
speare on  this  subject.  Cassius,  more  than  any 
one  else,  appears  as  the  author  of  the  plot.  But 
Seneca,  putting  him  on  a  level  with  Tillius  Cimber, 
whom  he  represents  as  a  drunkard  and  a  brawler, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  75 

says  that  the  secret  of  the  conspiracy  was  intrusted 
to  him,  —  tarn  creditum  est  Tillio  Cimbro  quam  C. 
Cassio.  No  one  can  think  that,  if  he  had  regarded 
Cassius  as  the  author  of  the  conspiracy,  or  even 
as  a  principal  conspirator,  he  would  have  spoken 
of  the  secret  of  the  conspiracy  as  having  been 
intrusted  to  him. 

But  it  is  time  to  return  to  the  detail  of  the  sup 
posed  assassination.  Suetonius  says,  that  Cimber 
Tullius,  upon  Caesar's  repulsing  him  by  a  gesture, 
laid  hold  of  Caesar's  robe  on  both  shoulders.  He 
indicates  no  purpose  in  his  doing  so;  but  this 
purpose  was  supplied  by  tradition  in  two  opposite 
forms,  as  I  shall  now  proceed  to  show. 

Suetonius  does  not  represent  Tullius  as  pulling 
off  Caesar's  toga,  or  robe.  This  circumstance  is 
added  by  Plutarch,  who  says,  that  he  pulled  it  off 
from  his  neck, —  aVo  rov  rpaxfaov, —  or,  as  he  ex- 
presses it  in  another  place,  "  he  pulled  it  off  with 
both  hands  from  his  shoulders."  The  account  of 
Dion  agrees  essentially  with  that  of  Plutarch.  But 
Appian  says,  that,  dragging  his  (Caesar's)  garment, 
he  drew  it  upon  his  neck,  TO  el^a  Trepio-Traa-as  eTrl 
TOV  rpa^r]\ov  el\Ke*  Was  the  idea  in  Appian's 

*  I  do  not  understand  (I  here  speak  in  my  own  person,  not  that  of 
Strauss)  how  Schweighaeuser,  in  his  edition  of  Appian  (III  776), 


76        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

mind,  that  by  dragging  Caesar's  garment  round  him 
the  free  use  of  his  arms  would  be  prevented1? 
And  did  Plutarch  and  Dion,  on  the  other  hand, 
conceive  that  by  pulling  it  off  he  would  be  more 
exposed  to  the  blows  of  the  conspirators,  their 
weapons  being  less  likely  to  be  impeded  by  its 
folds'? 

Whatever  may  be  imagined  respecting  this  action 
of  Tullius  Cimber,  as  we  may  call  him,  there  is 
another  account  common  to  Suetonius,  Plutarch, 
Appian,  and  Dion,  which  cannot  be  reconciled  with 
historical  probability.  According  to  them  all, 
Caesar,  when  dying,  covered  his  face  and  the  lower 
part  of  his  body  with  his  robe,  that  he  might  fall 
in  a  decent  manner.  The  same  robe  which  had 
either  been  pulled  away  from  him,  or  dragged 
round  him,  so  as  to  confine  his  arms !  Suetonius 
thus  describes  this  circumstance:  —  "toga  caput 
obvolvit :  simul  sinistra  manu  sinum  ad  ima  crura 
deduxit,  quo  honestius  caderet,  etiam  inferiore  cor- 
poris  parte  velata."  But  how  could  Caesar,  when 
dying  under  twenty-three  wounds,  (for  there  is  a 
suspicious  agreement  among  Suetonius,  Plutarch, 
and  Appian  in  mentioning  this  precise  number,) 

could  suppose  that  these  words  were  to  be  rendered,  Cimbrum  togam 
Ccesaris  prehensam  deorsum  traxisse,  ut  collum  nudaretur. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  77 

have  retained  strength  enough  to  recover  his  robe 
from  the  conspirators,  or,  (if  we  receive  the  account 
of  Appian,)  to  have  unwound  it  from  his  body, 
so  that  he  might  dispose  it  in  a  more  becoming 
manner?  If  he  had  had  the  strength  remain- 
ing to  do  so,  what  probability  is  there,  that  the 
conspirators  would  have  stood  quietly  round  while 
he  was  performing  the  acts  reported  I  Their  fero- 
cious attack  on  him,  as  we  shall  see  by  and  by,  was 
continued  till  life  was  extinct,  so  as  to  leave  him 
no  possibility  of  thus  attending  to  decorum. 

The  discrepances  among  the  different  accounts 
of  the  transaction  are  so  great,  as  to  compel  us, 
even  while  noticing  only  the  most  important,  to 
retrace  our  steps,  and  to  resume  the  narrative  at  a 
period  preceding  the  supposed  death  of  Caesar. 
Suetonius  says,  that  the  signal  having  been  given 
by  Cimber's  laying  hold  of  the  robe  of  Caesar,  Cas- 
sius  wounded  him  in  front  a  little  below  the  throat. 
But  Plutarch  agrees  with  Suetonius  neither  as  to 
the  name  of  the  person  who  gave  the  first  wound, 
nor  the  position  in  which  he  was  standing,  nor  the 
nature  of  the  wound.  The  wound,  he  says,  was 
given  by  Casca,  who  was  standing  behind  Caesar, 
and  who  wounded  him,  he  in  one  place  says, 
"  in  the  neck,"  and  in  another,  "  in  the  shoulder  "  ; 

7* 


78         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

while  Appian,  differing  from  both,  says,  that  Casca 
reached  over  Caesar's  head,  and,  aiming  at  his  throat, 
missed,  and  wounded  him  in  the  breast.  All  cer- 
tain history  disappears  in  the  confusion  of  these 
contradictory  accounts. 

We  will  now  pass  in  review  the  different  words 
reported  to  have  been  uttered  during  the  attack  on 
Csesar,  by  him  and  by  others.  Suetonius  relates, 
that,  when  Cimber  laid  hold  of  his  robe,  he  ex- 
claimed, "  That  is  violence,"  —  Ista  quidem  vis  est 
Plutarch,  Appian,  and  Dion  say  nothing  of  this 
exclamation.  Appian  relates,  that  Cimber  called 
out,  in  Greek,  to  the  other  conspirators,  "  Friends ! 
why  do  you  delay] "  —  Tl  ppaSvvere,  w  $i\oi ;  But, 
again,  nothing  is  said  of  this  by  the  other  narra- 
tors. The  account  of  Plutarch  is  also  peculiar  to 
himself.  He  says  that  Caesar,  when  struck  by 
Casca,  turned  round  upon  him  and  laid  hold  of 
his  sword,  crying  out  in  Latin,  "  Villain !  what  do 
you  mean  1 "  and  that  Casca  at  the  same  instant 
called  to  his  brother  in  Greek,  saying,  "  Brother, 
help ! "  Each  historian  has  his  own  separate  story ; 
and  how  is  this  to  be  accounted  for  except  by  sup- 
posing that  they  are  all  equally  destitute  of  any 
historical  basis,  and  are  the  products  of  an  ever- 
varying  tradition  1 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  79 

The  story  of  Plutarch  is  expressly  contradicted 
by  Suetonius,  who  says,  that  Csesar,  after  receiving 
the  first  blow,  "  uttered  only  a  single  groan,  but  did 
not  speak " ;  he  died  uno  modo  ad  primum  ictum 
gemitu  sine  wee  edito.  Tradition,  however,  had 
burdened  itself  with  another  story  of  words  uttered 
by  Caesar,  which,  though  it  is  expressly  rejected  by 
Suetonius  and  Dion,  and  not  mentioned  by  Plu- 
tarch and  Appian,  has  yet  become  classical  in 
modern  times.  "  He  did  not  speak,"  says  Sueto- 
nius, "  though  some  have  related  that,  when  M. 
Brutus  assaulted  him,  he  said  to  him,  '  And  are 
you  one  of  them  1  you,  my  son  I ' :  The  question 
has  even  been  discussed  by  modern  critics,  for  what 
reason  Caesar  called  Brutus  his  son.  But  though 
the  story  has  become  classical,  we  perceive  in  it,  as 
it  is  now  commonly  told  or  alluded  to,  a  new  in- 
fluence of  tradition  in  changing  its  form  since  it 
was  first  reported.  The  supposititious  words  as- 
cribed to  Caesar  are  given  by  Suetonius  in  Greek, 
to  the  effect  of  the  rendering  above.  But  the 
words  now  put  into  Caesar's  mouth  are  commonly 
in  Latin :  Et  tu  Brute  !  mi  fill !  "  And  you  too, 
Brutus  !  my  son  ! " 

No  accounts  can  be  more  contradictory  to  each 
other  than  those  of  Suetonius  and  Appian  concern- 


80         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ing  the  behavior  of  Caesar  during  the  attack  on  him. 
The  essential  trait  of  that  of  Suetonius,  namely, 
the  silence  of  Caesar,  has  already  been  brought  to 
notice.  Suetonius  says,  that,  when  he  received  his 
first  wound  from  Cassius  (not  Casca,  it  is  to  be 
remembered),  "he  seized  his  arm  and  pierced  it 
with  his  writing-style,  and  endeavored  to  spring 
forward,  but  was  hindered  by  another  wound. 
Then,  perceiving  that  he  was  aimed  at  on  every 
side  with  drawn  daggers,  he  covered  his  head  with 
his  robe,  and  with  his  left  hand  drew  it  down  to 
his  feet,  that  he  might  fall  in  a  more  decorous 
manner,  even  the  lower  part  of  his  body  being 
covered.  And  thus  he  was  pierced  with  three-and- 
twenty  wounds,  uttering  only  a  single  groan  at 
the  first  blow,  but  no  words."  With  this  compare 
the  account  of  Appian,  who  relates,  that,  on  receiv- 
ing the  first  wound  from  Casca  (not  Cassius),  he 
seized  his  arm,  and,  springing  down  from  his  seat, 
dragged  Casca  with  much  violence ;  and  that,  while 
struggling  with  him,  he  was  wounded  by  four 
others  of  the  conspirators,  and  turned  upon  each  of 
them,  "  raging  and  roaring  like  a  wild  beast,"  —  o-vv 
OPJTJ  Kai  jSorj)  KaOdirep  Bripiov,  —  till  at  last  he  fell  by 
the  statue  of  Pompey.  What  narrative  entitled  to 
any  historical  credit  could  be  constructed  out  of 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  81 

these  two  accounts'?  Plutarch's  relation  rather 
corresponds  with  that  of  Appian  in  the  more  im- 
portant parts  of  the  detail.  Dion's  agrees  essen- 
tially with  that  of  Suetonius. 

Caesar  fell,  says  Appian,  by  the  statue  of  Pom- 
pey.  Of  this  Suetonius  and  Dion  knew  nothing. 
It  is  plainly  a  traditional  embellishment  of  the 
story,  which  was  greedily  received  by  the  romance 
of  after  times.  The  purpose  of  it  was  to  represent 
Pompey,  though  dead,  as  triumphing  over  his  once 
victorious  rival.  His  statue  was  probably  con- 
ceived of  as  informed  by  his  spirit,  for  Plutarch 
relates  that  Cassius,  though  inclined  to  the  doc- 
trines of  Epicurus,  was  said,  before  the  commence- 
ment of  the  attack  on  Caesar,  to  have  turned  his 
eyes  to  the  statue  of  Pompey,  and  silently  invoked 
his  aid ;  and,  though  it  is  hard  to  understand  how 
any  one  could  become  acquainted  with  the  silent 
prayer  of  Cassius,  yet  the  supposed  indwelling  of 
the  spirit  of  Pompey  in  his  statue  agrees  with  the 
superstition  of  the  age.  The  feeling  which  gave 
rise  to  this  embellishment  is  fully  discovered  in  the 
narrative  of  Plutarch.  He  says,  Caesar,  "  either 
by  chance,  or  being  pushed  thither  by  the  con- 
spirators, fell  at  the  pedestal  of  Pompey's  statue, 
which  was  covered  with  his  blood ;  so  that  Pompey 


82  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

seemed  to  preside  over  the  vengeance  inflicted  on 
his  enemy,  who  was  lying  at  his  feet  in  his  last 
agonies,  pierced  with  many  wounds." 

HERE  we  will  stop  in  our  illustration,  not  of 
Strauss's  manner  of  writing,  —  for  no  illustration 
of  this  could  be  given  in  any  reasonable  number  of 
pages,  —  but  of  the  intrinsic  character  of  his  crit- 
icism. My  purpose  has  been  to  make  it  evident 
that  this  sort  of  criticism  is  inapplicable  to  human 
testimony,  to  profane  history  equally  as  to  the 
Gospels ;  and  that  its  results  have  no  tendency  to 
invalidate  the  essential  truth  of  any  narratives 
subjected  to  it.  I  speak  of  that  spurious  criticism, 
which,  setting  aside  all  the  knowledge  respecting 
the  fallibility  and  inaccuracy  of  human  testimony 
that  experience  is  continually  teaching  us,  repre- 
sents it  as  an  objection  to  the  essential  truth  of  an 
account  found  in  the  narratives  of  different  writers, 
that  these  narratives  do  not  agree  with  each  other 
in  all  their  parts,  that  "they  are  more  or  less  in- 
crusted  with  errors  of  various  kinds,  and  that  none 
of  them  is  without  flaws.  Truth  is  not  dug  from 
the  mine  of  history  as  one  entire  and  perfect  chry- 
solite, any  more  than  it  is  so  found  in  the  every-day 
relations  of  common  life.  Different  original  ac- 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE   GOSPELS.  83 

counts  of  the  same  series  of  events,  when  they  agree 
in  the  main  facts,  but  are  inconsistent  in  minor 
particulars,  confirm  each  other;  since  they  show 
that  the  narrators  give  independent  testimony,  and 
had  each  separate  sources  of  information,  while, 
on  the  contrary,  were  it  possible  to  find  different 
accounts  professedly  original,  perfectly  agreeing 
in  all  their  details,  this  would  be  a  phenomenon 
hitherto  so  unknown,  as  either  to  justify  the  sus- 
picion of  collusion  in  the  writers,  or  to  lead  at 
once  to  the  inference,  that  we  had,  in  fact,  but  the 
testimony  of  one  witness,  whom  the  others  had 
copied 

Were  there  a  prepossession  against  the  truth  of 
the  history  of  Caesar,  did  this  subject  concern  the 
religious  character  and  moral  responsibility  of 
men,  a  work  composed  after  the  manner  of  Strauss, 
with  the  design  of  proving  that  history  to  be  fabu- 
lous, would,  I  doubt  not,  find  as  many  admirers  as 
there  have  been  of  Strauss's  own  work  on  the 
Gospels,  who  would  look  upon  it,  with  equal 
justice,  as  a  learned  and  elaborate  piece  of  reason- 
ing. Certainly  one  speaks  very  far  within  bounds 
in  saying,  that  the  accounts  of  the  ministry,  death, 
and  resurrection  of  Christ,  given  in  the  four  Gos- 
pels, which  Strauss  has  subjected  to  his  microscopic 


84  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF   THE 

criticism,*  present  no  such,  contradictions  and  im- 
probabilities as  exist,  not  merely  in  the  accounts 
of  the  assassination  of  Csesar,  as  given  by  the  four 
historians  whom  I  have  quoted,  but  throughout 
the  ancient  narratives  and  notices  of  his  life. 

In  the  first  volume  of  "  The  Evidences  of  the 
Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,"  in  an  Additional 
Note  "  On  the  Origin  of  the  Correspondences 
among  the  First  Three  Gospels,"  I  have  pointed 
out  discrepances  and  inconsistencies  among  the 
Gospels,  the  number  of  which  bears  a  large  pro- 
portion to  the  number  of  all  those  which  Strauss 
has  remarked  upon  in  his  three  volumes.  But  it 
did  not  enter  my  mind,  nor,  I  will  venture  to 
assert,  has  it  entered  the  mind  of  any  one  of  my 
readers,  that  I  could  be  considered  as  undermining 
the  authenticity  of  the  Gospels.  On  the  contrary, 
I  believed  that  I  was  establishing  their  authen- 
ticity by  showing  that  the  discrepances  among 

*  In  remarking  on  the  criticism  of  Strauss,  one  is  reminded  of  the 
lines  of  Pope :  — 

"  The  critic  eye,  that  microscope  of  wit, 
Sees  hairs  and  pores,  examines  bit  by  bit : 
How  parts  relate  to  parts,  or  they  to  whole, 
The  body's  harmony,  the  beaming  soul, 
Are  things  which  Kuster,  Burman,  Wasse,  shall  see 
When  man's  whole  frame  is  obvious  to  a  flea." 


GENUINENESS  OF   THE   GOSPELS.  85 

them  were  of  such  a  character,  that,  when  con- 
sidered in  connection  with  their  essential  agree- 
ment, it  was  evident  that  the  writers  of  those  books 
must  either  have  been  Apostles,  or  have  derived 
their  information  from  Apostles.  The  discrepances 
among  the  Gospels  have,  from  the  time  of  Origen, 
been  familiar  to  Christians,  and  made  subjects  of 
discussion  by  them.  They  have  been  urged,  and 
correctly  urged,  to  disprove  the  theological  doc- 
trine of  the  divine  authorship  of  the  Gospels,  or, 
in  other  words,  the  doctrine  of  their  inspiration. 
The  novelty  of  Strauss's  work  consists  in  the  use 
which  he  has  made  of  them  to  disprove  the  gen- 
uineness and  authenticity  of  the  Gospels,  consid- 
ered as  the  proper  works  of  human  authors ;  — 
not,  indeed,  in  the  assumption  of  the  principle  on 
which  he  has  proceeded,  but  in  his  indefatigable 
prolixity  in  the  application  of  it.  Neither  the 
principle  nor  the  application  of  it  is  in  itself  new. 
For  example,  one  of  the  most  notorious,  and  not 
of  the  least  able,  of  infidel  writers  thus  reasons :  — 
"  Not  any  two  of  these  writers  [the  Evangelists] 
agree  in  reciting  exactly  in  the  same  words  [the 
italics  are  his  own]  the  written  inscription,  short 
as  it  is,  which  they  tell  us  was  put  over  Christ 
when  he  was  crucified;  and,  besides  this,  Mark 

8 


86  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

says  he  was  crucified  at  the  third  hour  (nine  in 
the  morning),  and  John  says  it  was  at  the  sixth 
hour  (twelve  at  noon). 

"  The  inscription  is  thus  stated  in  those  books : 

Matthew, '  This  is  Jesus,  the  King  of  the  Jews.' 

Mark, '  The  King  of  the  Jews.' 

Luke, '  This  is  the  King  of  the  Jews.' 

John, '  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  King  of  the  Jews.' 

"  We  may  infer  from  these  circumstances,  trivial 
as  they  are,  that  those  writers,  whoever  they  were, 
and  in  whatever  time  they  lived,  were  not  present 
at  the  scene."  * 

The  inference  obviously  intended,  because  it  is 
the  only  inference  that  may  even  seem  to  be  to  the 
purpose,  is,  that  the  Evangelists  are  not  credible 
writers.  It  has  never  been  maintained  that  any 
one  of  them,  except  John,  was  present  at  the  scene. 
But  the  inference  actually  required  to  invalidate 
the  authenticity  of  the  Gospels  is  one  which  no 
man  of  sense  could  think  of  drawing ;  namely,  that 
Jesus  was  not  crucified  either  at  the  third,  or  the 
sixth,  or  any  other  hour,  and  consequently  that  no 
inscription  whatever  was  put  upon  his  cross,  —  this 
fact  being  further  evinced  by  the  contradictory 
accounts  given  of  that  pretended  writing. 

*  Paine's  Age  of  Reason,  Part  II. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        87 

IN  a  few  pages  of  an  Additional  Note  to  the 
first  volume  of  "  The  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness 
of  the  Gospels,"  *  I  have  endeavored  to  show  that 
the  first  two  chapters  of  our  present  Gospel  of 
Matthew  were  not  the  work  of  that  Evangelist. 
It  is  with  a  discussion  of  the  difficulties  in  these 
two  chapters  and  in  the  first  two  chapters  of  Luke, 
that  Strauss  commences  his  critical  examination 
of  the  Gospels.  This  discussion  fills  about  two 
hundred  pages.  He  assumes,  without  argument, 
that  the  first  two  chapters  ascribed  to  Matthew 
were  originally  a  part  of  the  Gospel  which  bears 
his  name.  Through  these  pages,  and  through  a 
hundred  more  of  like  character,  —  as  relating  to 
events  of  which  the  Apostles  had  not  personal 
knowledge,! — he  prepares  his  readers  for  the  ex- 
amination of  those  narratives  concerning  the  public 
ministry  of  Jesus,  in  which  alone,  as  we  believe,  is 
preserved  the  original  testimony  of  the  Apostles, 
affirming  on  their  own  authority  the  truth  of  what 
they  related. 

The  whole  argument  of  Strauss  in  the  first  two 
hundred  pages  to  which  I  have  referred,  admits 

*  Additional  Note  A,  Section  V.  i. 

f  Namely,  the  "  Relations  between  Jesus  and  John  the  Baptist,'* 
and  the  "  Baptism  and  Temptation  of  Jesus." 


88  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

of  being  placed  in  a  proper  light  in  a  few  sen- 
tences. 

We  will  admit  that  the  reasoning  is  fallacious 
which  I  have  formerly  used  to  prove  that  the  first 
two  chapters  of  Matthew's  Gospel  are  not  gen- 
uine. We  will  assume  that  the  narrative  con- 
tained in  them  proceeded  from  the  original  author 
of  the  Gospel,  whoever  he  was.  I  have  formerly 
not  conceded,  but  maintained,  that  this  narrative 
contradicts  that  of  Luke ;  and  that  circumstances 
are  related  in  it  which  are  in  themselves  incredi- 
ble. Nothing  further  can  be  asked  by  one  who 
denies  the  authenticity  of  the  Gospels,  unless,  with 
Strauss,  he  deny  also  the  possibility  of  a  miracle,  — 
a  denial  by  which  all  discussion  about  the  truth 
of  any  particular  account  of  a  miracle  is  fore- 
closed. 

Yet  this  denial  is,  as  we  have  seen,  very  early 
put  forward  by  Strauss  as  a  fundamental  position 
of  his  work,  and  is  continually  reappearing 
throughout  the  course  of  it  as  a  main  element  of 
his  criticism  on  the  Gospels.  If,  however,  the 
principle  be  settled,  that  a  miracle  is  impossible, 
there  can  be  no  greater  waste  of  time  than  to  argue 
at  length  from  other  considerations  against  the 
truth  of  the  narratives  of  the  Evangelists.  Some 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  89 

general  solution  of  the  existence  and  reception  of 
such  a  mass  of  fables  as  they  have  related  is  rea- 
sonably to  be  expected,  but  prolix  discussions  of 
these  fables,  considered  individually,  may  well  be 
dispensed  with.  One  might  as  profitably  spend 
his  time  in  a  minute  critical  examination  of  the 
mythological  stories  concerning  the  birth,  labors, 
and  death  of  Hercules,  with  the  purpose  of  prov- 
ing the  narratives  concerning  him  to  be  false,  by 
an  exhibition  of  their  inconsistencies  and  improb- 
abilities. These  remarks  are  applicable  not  merely 
to  the  portion  of  Strauss's  work  immediately  be- 
fore us,  but  to  his  whole  attack  on  the  authenticity 
of  the  Gospels.  As  a  groundwork  for  any  argu- 
ment or  explanation  on  this  subject,  we  must 
assume  the  possibility  of  their  authenticity,  that 
is,  the  possibility  of  a  miracle,  or,  in  other  words, 
the  possibility  that  we  do  not  know  that  God  can- 
not act  except  conformably  to  what  we  call  the 
laws  of  nature,  and  the  possibility  that  we  are  not 
so  acquainted  with  the  counsels  oft  his  infinite 
wisdom  and  goodness,  as  to  be  assured  of  all  which 
it  has  been  his  will  to  effect. 

Having,  therefore,  as  regards  the  narrative  in 
the  first  two  chapters  ascribed  to  Matthew,  con- 
ceded everything  except  the  prejudged  conclu- 

8* 


90        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

sion,  that  all  the  narratives  of  miraculous  events 
contained  in  the  Gospels  are  necessarily  false,  —  a 
conclusion  which  Strauss  assumes  before  entering 
into  his  particular  arguments  against  their  truth, 
and  constantly  interweaves  with  his  reasoning,  — 
we  will  now  consider  what  follows  from  our  ad- 
missions. 

I  have  formerly  maintained  it  to  be  highly 
probable,  that  Matthew,  as  an  Apostle,  must  have 
been  aware  of  the  errors  of  the  narrative  contained 
in  these  first  two  chapters.*  If,  as  I  have  sup- 
posed, the  historical  evidence  concerning  these 
chapters  leads  us  to  doubt  their  genuineness,  then 
the  argument  that  their  contents  are  not  such  as 
we  might  expect  from  an  Apostle,  may  be  of  de- 
cisive weight.  But  we  now  assume  that  these 
chapters  were  originally  a  part  of  the  Gospel  as- 
cribed to  Matthew,  and  this  argument  alone  is,  as 
I  am  about  to  show,  of  no  weight  to  invalidate  the 
historical  evidence  that  has  been  adduced  to  prove 
that  this  Gospel  was  his  work. 

In  the  supposed  case  that  the  two  chapters  are 
genuine,  the  following  considerations  at  once  pre- 
sent themselves. — We  know  nothing  of  the  per- 

*  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  I.  p.  Iviii,  seqq. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  91 

sonal  history  of  Matthew  after  the  death  of  our 
Lord.  We  do  not  know  how  long  he  remained  in 
the  society  of  the  other  Apostles,  or  how  much  he 
was  separated  from  them.  If  he  remained  in  their 
society,  we  have  no  reason  to  think  that  the  facts 
respecting  the  birth  of  our  Lord  were  a  common 
topic  of  conversation  among  them.  However  im- 
probable, therefore,  it  may  be,  that  as  an  Apostle 
he  would  be  very  incorrectly  informed  respecting 
these  facts,  yet  this  is  an  improbability  which 
cannot  be  opposed  to  the  proof  that  the  Gospel 
ascribed  to  him  was  his  work ;  and  we  are  now 
arguing  on  the  supposition  that  the  two  chapters 
were  originally  a  part  of  it. 

It  appears,  then,  on  this  supposition,  that 
Matthew  adopted  and  embodied  in  his  Gospel  a 
false  narration  of  circumstances  connected  with  the 
birth  and  infancy  of  our  Lord.  What  follows  from 
this  I  We  had  no  reason  before  to  suppose  that  he 
was  well  qualified  as  an  historical  critic  to  decide 
on  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  a  narrative.  He  was 
originally  of  a  class  looked  upon  by  his  country- 
men as  degraded,  a  Jewish  tax-gatherer  in  the  ser- 
vice of  the  Roman  government.  With  his  Gospel 
before  us,  we  cannot  suppose  him  to  have  had  any 
literary  culture;  and  we  have  no  authentic  account 


92         INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

of  his  having  in  any  way  distinguished  himself, 
except  by  its  composition,  after  becoming  an  Apos- 
tle. He  had  no  personal  knowledge  concerning 
the  supposed  events  narrated  in  the  first  two 
chapters,  and  was  writing  about  sixty  years  after 
their  occurrence.  Under  these  circumstances,  he 
adopted  an  erroneous  narrative  of  those  events. 
He  adopted,  I  say,  this  narrative ;  for  no  one  can 
believe  that,  sixty  years  after  the  birth  of  Jesus, 
the  Evangelist  wrote  from  his  own  imagination  a 
fabulous  account  of  circumstances  attending  and 
following  that  event,  —  an  account  which,  having 
never  before  been  heard  of,  would  be  regarded  by 
his  readers  with  equal  astonishment  and  incredu- 
lity. The  narrative  must  have  been  reported  and 
believed  previously  to  his  incorporating  it  in  his 
Gospel. 

But  if  it  was  believed  by  others,  what  is  there 
in  the  fact  that  it  was  believed  by  Matthew  which 
may  change,  in  any  considerable  degree,  our  opin- 
ion of  him  as  a  writer  1  Or,  rather,  to  state  the 
only  question  really  at  issue,  What  is  there  in 
this  fact  to  invalidate  in  any  degree  his  testimony 
to  what  he  relates  as  of  his  own  knowledge,  —  the 
miracles  and  the  teaching  of  our  Lord  I  Nothing 
whatever.  On  the  contrary,  the  striking  difference 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.        93 

between  the  first  two  chapters  and  that  portion  of 
the  Gospel  which  relates  to  the  public  ministry 
of  Jesus  is  alone  sufficient  to  create  a  strong 
presumption,  that,  in  the  one  case,  we  have  an 
erroneous  tradition,  and,  in  the  other,  authentic 
testimony.  It  is  not  necessary  to  our  argument, 
but  it  should  be  remembered,  that  the  events  to 
which  the  Evangelist  testifies  in  his  own  person 
are  confirmed  by  the  irresistible  evidence  of  phe- 
nomena which  could  not  have  existed  without 
those  events  as  their  cause. 

Reasoning  of  a  similar  kind  may  be  applied  to 
the  case  of  Luke ;  and  every  reader  can  make  for 
himself  the  necessary  modifications  in  so  applying 
it.  The  main  point  to  be  attended  to  is,  that  the 
errors  of  either  Evangelist  (on  the  supposition  that 
the  errors  of  the  first  two  chapters  are  to  be  as- 
cribed to  Matthew)  do  not  disqualify  him  from 
being  a  reliable  witness  to  the  truth  of  the  mira- 
cles of  Jesus. 

Nor  do  either  those  errors,  or  the  inconsisten- 
cies between  the  two  narratives,  discredit  the  main 
fact  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  both,  —  the 
miraculous  birth  of  our  Lord.  So  far  from  this, 
the  only  plausible  solution  of  the  existence  of  two 
such  discordant  narratives,  at  so  early  a  period,  is, 


94  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

that  the  main  fact  is  true.  Supposing  the  whole 
story  of  the  miraculous  birth  of  our  Lord  to  be 
a  fiction,  this  fiction  must  have  had  a  primitive 
form.  The  principal  fact  must  have  been  related 
with  some  detail  of  circumstances  represented  as 
having  been  connected  with  it.  The  primitive  fic- 
tion, if  it  obtained  currency,  may  have  been  added 
to  or  altered  in  the  process  of  tradition.  But, 
if  we  assume  that  the  original  story  respecting 
the  birth  of  our  Lord  was  a  fable,  derived,  as  it 
must  have  been,  from  the  invention  of  some  indi- 
vidual, and  put  into  circulation  by  him,  it  is  hardly 
credible  that  another  individual,  equally  without 
any  basis  of  truth  on  which  to  rest,  should  have  de- 
vised another  fable  irreconcilable  with  the  former. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  might  be  expected  before- 
hand, that  such  an  event  as  the  miraculous  birth 
of  our  Lord,  the  facts  concerning  which  were 
known  to  so  few  individuals,  should,  in  the  lapse 
of  time,  be  enveloped  in  many  fabulous  circum- 
stances. The  narratives  of  no  events  are  so  likely 
to  be  altered,  in  passing  through  the  mouths  of 
different  reporters,  as  those  of  miraculous  events ; 
and  the  fact  that  the  accounts  of  the  miracles  of 
Jesus,  as  related  in  the  Gospels,  are  so  free  from 
any  traces  of  having  been  adulterated  by  tradition, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  95 

is  one  of  the  strongest  internal  proofs  of  the  gen- 
uineness and  authenticity  of  those  books. 

IN  examining  the  Gospels,  after  the  manner  of 
Strauss,  for  the  purpose  of  discovering  whether 
they  afford  internal  evidence  destructive  of  their 
credibility,  we  must  keep  distinctly  in  mind  the 
only  question  to  be  settled.  Putting  out  of  view 
the  notion  of  the  impossibility  of  a  miracle,  (which, 
as  I  have  said,  precludes  all  argument  on  the  sub- 
ject,) the  only  question  to  be  settled  is  this  :  Do, 
or  do  not,  the  Gospels  present  such  appearances  as 
to  make  it  evident,  or  to  create  a  presumption, 
that  their  writers  were  not  well-informed  and 
trustworthy  witnesses  respecting  the  events  of  the 
public  ministry  of  Jesus  ? 

When  this  question  is  distinctly  apprehended, 
the  discussion  is  greatly  contracted.  It  will  re- 
late only  to  their  genuineness,  not  to  their  essen- 
tial authenticity.  It  appears  that,  without  further 
examination,  a  very  large  portion  of  such  criti- 
cisms as  are  found  in  works  like  that  of  Strauss 
may  at  once  be  laid  out  of  consideration,  as  having 
no  bearing  upon  it.  But  this  question  has  been 
confounded  with  another  altogether  different,  — 
whether  the  narratives  contained  in  the  Gospels 


96  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

are  free  from  error.  The  affirmative  of  this  ques- 
tion is  not  to  be  maintained.  But  no  intelligent 
and  well-informed  man  will  suppose  that  the  ex- 
istence of  such  errors  and  inconsistencies  as  may 
be  found  in  those  narratives  tends  to  invalidate 
the  essential  authenticity  of  the  Gospels,  —  their 
authenticity  in  the  only  sense  in  which  we  use  the 
term  concerning  any  history,  the  general  truth  of 
which  is  undoubted. 

WE  pass  to  another  consideration.  —  If  the 
Gospels  are  the  works  of  eyewitnesses  or  of  well- 
informed  contemporaries,  the  mythical  theory  of 
Strauss,  as  he  himself  recognizes,  is  wholly  ex- 
cluded ;  and  so,  likewise,  is  every  other  theory 
which  denies  the  miraculous  origin  of  our  religion, 
excepting  that  theory,  if  such  a  theory  may  be 
considered  as  existing,  which  refers  its  origin  to 
what  may  be  called  the  pseudo-miracle  of  the  suc- 
cess of  pure  falsehood.  It  is,  therefore,  the  main 
immediate  object  of  Strauss's  work  to  prove  that 
the  Gospels  are  not  genuine,  by  showing  that  they 
contain  accounts  which  could  not  have  proceeded 
from  well-informed  narrators. 

But  in  respect  to  the  ultimate  purpose  of  Strauss, 
namely,  to  disprove  the  truth  of  our  religion,  the 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  97 

conclusion  arrived  at  by  him,  that  the  Gospels  are 
not  genuine,  at  once  deprives  his  criticisms  on 
those  books  of  any  weight,  and  invalidates  all  his 
arguments  against  Christianity,  except,  indeed,  that 
argument  which  consists  in  the  denial  of  the  pos- 
sibility of  a  miracle.  His  reasoning  is  self-destruc- 
tive. 

Let  us  admit  that  the  Gospels  are  not  genuine, 
that  they  are  productions  of  the  second  century, 
founded  on  previous  imperfect,  written  narratives, 
or  on  oral  traditions,  or  on  both.  This,  I  think,  it 
has  been  formerly  shown,  could  not  have  been  the 
fact ;  *  but  we  will  now  reason  on  the  supposition 
that  it  was  so.  Upon  this  supposition,  then,  that 
they  are  productions  of  the  second  century,  what 
character  might  we  expect  them  to  have  consist- 
ently with  the  truth  of  Christianity,  that  is,  con- 
sistently with  the  truth  of  the  essential  facts 
concerning  the  miraculous  office,  the  character, 
acts,  teaching,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Christ? 
Let  an  objector,  who  does  not  assume  that  a  mira- 
cle is  impossible,  magnify  at  his  will  the  discre- 
pances among  them,  or  what  he  regards  as  the 
intrinsic  improbabilities  in  their  accounts  of  par- 

*  See  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  I.  168,  seqq. 


98        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ticular  events,  yet  no  one,  acquainted  with  the 
nature  of  human  testimony, — especially  with  what 
must  be  its  nature  in  relation  to  facts  so  marvel- 
lous and  unparalleled,  when  passing  through  a  se- 
ries of  reporters,  —  will  imagine  that  there  could 
be  fewer  discrepances  and  improbabilities  than 
exist  in  the  narratives  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  if  these 
narratives  were  written  in  the  second  century,  on 
however  firm  a  basis  they  might  rest  of  essential 
truth.  Establish  the  position  that  the  Gospels 
were  not  written  by  those  to  whom  they  have  been 
ascribed,  and  the  whole  body  of  criticisms  upon 
them,  such  as  are  brought  forward  by  writers  like 
Strauss,  becomes  utterly  irrelevant  and  futile  as 
regards  the  truth  of  Christianity.  Supposing  the 
truth  of  our  religion,  if  the  histories  of  Jesus  which 
we  now  possess  were  not  written  till  the  second 
century,  it  would  be  altogether  unreasonable  to 
expect  that  they  would  be  exposed  to  fewer  objec- 
tions than  Strauss  has  urged  against  them. 

If  we  prove  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  we 
prove  the  truth  of  Christianity ;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  to  disprove  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospels, 
were  that  possible,  would  not  be  to  advance  a  step 
toward  disproving  its  truth.  It  is  evident,  how- 
ever, that  the  mistake  has  commonly  been  com- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  99 

mitted  by  unbelievers  of  supposing  that  such 
would  be  the  case,  and  that  this  error  has  been 
acquiesced  in  by  many  believers.  But  in  order  to 
disprove  the  truth,  or,  in  other  words,  the  miracu- 
lous origin,  of  our  religion,  it  is  necessary  to  show 
that  all  those  facts  in  the  history  of  the  world 
which  imply  its  miraculous  origin  as  their  cause 
never  existed,  or  that  some  other  sufficient  solu- 
tion may  be  given  of  their  existence. 

The  case  may  be  thus  stated.  If  the  Gospels 
are,  as  we  believe,  the  works  of  Apostles  and  of 
companions  of  Apostles,  the  question  of  the  essen- 
tial truth  of  their  narratives  is  decided.  If  they 
are,  as  Strauss  and  many  other  German  theologians 
have  contended,  the  compilations  of  anonymous  in- 
dividuals in  the  second  century,  full  of  errors,  —  as, 
in  that  case,  we  might  reasonably  expect,  —  then 
neither  their  late  compilation  nor  the  existence  of 
those  errors  can  invalidate  the  decisive  evidences 
of  the  miraculous  origin  of  our  religion  still  to  be 
derived  from  them,  and  to  be  derived  from  other 
sources  beside  that  particular  one  which  we  now 
believe  to  exist,  namely,  the  testimony  of  trust- 
worthy witnesses  of  the  ministry  of  our  Lord,  given 
either  by  themselves  or  by  those  to  whpm  they  had 
directly  communicated  their  knowledge,  under  cir- 


100  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

cumstances  which  preclude  the  notion  of  essential 
error  or  of  intentional  deception  as  an  incredible 
absurdity.  And  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  among 
the  phenomena  which,  on  this  supposition,  would 
evince  the  miraculous  origin  of  Christianity,  would 
be  the  compilation  of  such  histories  of  Christ  in 
the  second  century.  If  the  Gospels  had  not  ap- 
peared till  this  time,  they  would  undoubtedly  be 
far  less  correct  narratives  than  they  are ;  they 
would  have  been  full  of  traditionary  fables.  But  it 
may  well  be  doubted,  whether  the  evidence  of  the 
truth  of  our  religion  would  be  weakened.  The 
existence  of  such  a  representation  of  the  character 
and  ministry  of  Christ  in  the  Gentile  world,  found 
in  the  second  century,  in  certain  books,  to  be  as- 
cribed to  anonymous  Jewish  writers,  would  be,  to 
say  the  least,  as  difficult  to  account  for,  on  any 
other  supposition  than  that  of  its  essential  truth, 
as  the  existence  of  such  a  representation  in  the 
Gospels  considered  as  genuine. 

THE  work  of  Strauss  has  obtained  celebrity,  and 
produced  an  effect,  probably  much  disproportioned 
to  the  number  of  its  readers ;  for,  in  the  present 
state  of  theological  literature  and  inquiry,  it  cannot 
be  supposed  that  the  readers  of  so  long  a  work  of 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  101 

such  a  character  have  been  numerous,  at  least  out 
of  Germany.  But  it  has  furnished  a  pretence  for 
infidelity,  by  being  a  very  long,  and  what  has  been 
reputed  an  elaborate  and  learned,  work  in  its  de- 
fence ;  and  the  very  circumstance  that  its  actual 
contents  were  little  known  has  undoubtedly  mag- 
nified the  notion  of  their  importance.  The  direct 
effect  which  it  may  have  produced  on  some  minds 
by  the  views  which  it  presents,  is  to  be  ascribed  to 
various  causes.  The  fact  that  there  are  errors  in 
the  Gospels  is  confounded  throughout  with  the, 
conclusion  that  the  writers  are  not  credible  wit- 
nesses. The  doctrine  of  the  impossibility  of  a 
miracle  is  constantly  kept  in  view,  to  determine  all 
questions  against  the  truth  of  the  Gospels.  The 
opinions  of  the  Rationalists  (so  called)  of  the 
school  of  Paulus,  who  resolve  all  miracles  into 
erroneous  accounts  of  natural  events,  are  produced 
in  detail  by  the  author  in  his  criticisms  on  many 
passages,  and  are  triumphantly  confuted ;  and  so, 
too,  are  opinions  which  he  ascribes  to  some  de- 
fenders of  Christianity  among  his  countrymen: 
and  this  may  give  an  impression  of  his  power  of 
reasoning  that  will  unduly  affect  th.e  judgment  of 
certain  readers.  His  untiring  prolixity  may  weary 
others  into  a  belief  that  there  is  some  force  in  what 


102  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

he  says.  But  perhaps  the  main  direct  effect  pro- 
duced by  his  work  has  resulted  from  its  treating 
all  those  facts  in  which  our  happiness  and  virtue 
are  most  interested,  —  those  facts  which  address 
themselves  to  our  noblest  sympathies  and  senti- 
ments, which,  even  if  they  were  divested  of  reality, 
would  remain  the  most  glorious  of  imaginations,  — 
from  its  treating  those  facts  in  the  driest  manner, 
on  the  narrowest  basis  of  thought,  and  with  a  heart- 
less disregard  of  the  associations  connected  with 
them  in  the  mind  of  a  religious  man,  and  of  the 
bearing  of  the  discussion  on  the  essential  interests 
of  humanity.  This  is  the  characteristic  tone  of 
his  book ;  and  it  may  be  difficult  for  one  who 
undertakes  the  task  of  reading  it  through  to 
escape  the  infection  of  it.  There  is  danger  that 
his  feelings  may  be  so  degraded,  his  views  so  con- 
tracted, and,  I  may  add,  his  reasoning  powers  so 
confused,  as  to  leave  his  mind  in  a  proper  state 
for  the  reception  of  German  mysticism  and  infi- 
delity. If  one  were  to  submit  to  hear  the  char- 
acter and  conduct  of  his  most  intimate  friend 
canvassed  and  questioned  at  great  length,  in  the 
manner  in  which  Strauss  discusses  the  history  of 
our  Lord,  he  might  find  it  difficult  to  feel  for  him 
the  same  confidence  and  respect  as  before. 


GENUINENESS  OE  THE  GOSPELS.  103 


CHAPTER    IV. 

ON  SOME  IMPOETANT  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE  GOSPELS. 

BEFORE  leaving  the  subject  of  the  criticism  of 
the  Gospels,  we  will  advert  to  some  general  facts 
concerning  them,  which  should  be  kept  in  mind 
by  him  who  would  read  them  intelligently. 

I  have  repeatedly  had  occasion  to  speak  of,  or 
to  refer  to,  their  character.  As  literary  composi- 
tions they  are  among  the  most  imperfect  of  his- 
tories. Either  individually  or  collectively,  they 
present  only  a  brief  narrative  of  some  of  the 
most  striking  events  in  our  Lord's  ministry,  and 
these  told  by  the  writers,  with  the  exception  of 
John,  for  the  most  part  nakedly  and  in  few  words. 
John's  narratives  of  particular  events  form  an  ex- 
ception to  this  remark ;  but  the  incompleteness  of 
his  history,  taken  as"  a  whole,  is  even  more  remark- 
able than  that  of  the  other  Gospels.  No  skill  is 
shown  by  anyone  of  the  Evangelists  in  connecting 
his  relations  together,  so  as  to  form  a  proper  con- 


104  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

tinuous  history,  however  brief.  No  explanations 
are  given,  except  a  few  which  are  parenthetical 
and  unimportant.  With  the  exception  of  some 
passages  in  John's  Gospel,  there  is  no  comment 
on  anything  told  which  discovers  the  writer's  feel- 
ings or  state  of  mind.  It  is  with  astonishment 
that  we  recognize  the  fact,  when  our  attention  is 
directed  to  it,  that  a  writer  wholly  uninterested  in 
the  events  related  could  not  have  recorded  them 
more  dryly  than  do  the  first  three  Evangelists  ;  — 
that  the  whole  effect  on  our  minds  of  what  is  told 
is  due  to  its  intrinsic  character.  I  may  turn  aside 
for  a  moment  to  observe,  that,  among  the  over- 
whelming evidences  of  the  genuineness  and  authen- 
ticity of  the  Gospels,  this  is  one  among  the  many 
of  those  which  we  may  speak  of  as  the  most  deci- 
sive. Such  works  could  not  have  been  written 
with  the  purpose  of  deception ;  —  but  the  notion 
of  intentional  deception  in  their  writers  is  now,  I 
suppose,  universally  regarded  as  foolish  and  obso- 
lete. It  is  equally  clear  that  they  could  not  have 
been  written  by  weak-minded  and  fanatical  indi- 
viduals, whose  imaginations**  had  been  strongly 
excited  by  some  extraordinary  delusion.  No  writ- 
ings can  present  a  stronger  contrast  than  do  the 
Gospels  to  what  might  be  expected  from  fanatics. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  105 

As  I  have  said,  the  Gospels  are  not  proper  his- 
tories. They  are  very  far  from  being  such  works 
as  might  furnish  an  intelligible  and  satisfactory 
account  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus,  of  its  character 
and  purpose,  to  one  previously  unacquainted  with 
the  essential  facts  concerning  it. 

Let  us  imagine  them  to  be  put  without  explana- 
tion into  the  hands  of  a  very  intelligent  heathen 
contemporary  of  their  authors,  but  one  as  imper- 
fectly informed  as  were  the  generality  of  Heathens 
of  the  condition  and  history  of  the  Jewish  nation, 
and  having  only  those  imperfect  notions  and  that 
hesitating  belief  of  the  great  truths  of  religion 
which  appear  even  in  the  writings  of  Cicero.  Sup- 
posing him  to  read  them  through  with  attention, 
what  ideas  of  their  meaning  and  bearing  would  he 
have  been  able  to  form,  corresponding  to  those  of 
an  enlightened  Christian  1  The  conceptions  of  the 
character  and  purpose  of  the  ministry  of  Christ, 
entertained  by  different  Christians  of  the  present 
day,  are  very  unlike  one  another ;  and  if  our  own 
be  correct,  they  must  be  the  result  of  much  thought 
and  reasoning,  and  derived  in  part  directly  and  in 
part  by  clear  inference  from  many  other  sources  of 
information  beside  the  Gospels,  —  especially  from 
the  history  of  the  Apostles  given  by  Luke,  and  the 


106        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

Epistles  of  St.  Paul.     I  do  not  say  that  every 

intelligent  and  rational  Christian  must  for  himself 

«» 

have  gone  through  the  process  requisite  to  acquire 
the  knowledge  necessary  in  order  to  understand 
the  Gospels';  but  if  he  have  not  done  so,  he  must 
be  indebted  for  it  to  the  labors  of  others. 

The  Gospels  imply  throughout,  that  the  great 
outlines  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus,  together  with  the 
condition  and  character  of  the  Jews  among  whom 
he  appeared,  and  the  more  striking  immediate 
results  of  what  he  did  and  taught,  were  already 
known  to  their  readers.  They  suppose,  in  like  man- 
ner, their  readers  to  be  already  acquainted  with 
many  circumstances  attending  particular  events 
and  discourses  of  our  Lord,  which  circumstances 
are  not  brought  into  view  in  their  narratives.  A 
knowledge  of  circumstances  which  the  Evangelists 
do  not  directly  state  is,  as  I  have  said,  the  main 
key  to  the  understanding  of  the  character  and 
bearing  of  what  they  relate,  —  the  great  source  of 
illustration  for  the  Gospels. 

I  will  give  a  single  example  of  the  manner  in 
which  the  Evangelists  relied  on  the  previous 
knowledge  of  their  readers,  or  rather,  as  one  may 
sayj  of  their  unconscious  assumption  of  the  exist- 
ence of  such  knowledge.  The  example  is,  perhaps, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       107 

the  more  striking,  because  there  is  no  process,  such 
as  exists  in  so  many  other  cases,  by  which  we  can 
now  recover  the  information  not  given  by  them, 
and  apply  it  to  the  completion  or  illustration  of 
their  narratives. 

There  are  at  least  seven  different  appearances 
of  our  Lord  after  his  resurrection  related  in  the 
Gospels.  Two  others,  occurring  before  his  ascen- 
sion, are  mentioned  by  St.  Paul.  And  Luke,  in 
the  beginning  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  says  that, 
"  after  he  suffered,  he  gave  many  certain  proofs  to 
his  Apostles  that  he  was  living,  being  seen  by  them 
during  the  course  of  forty  days,  and  teaching  the 
things  concerning  the  kingdom  of  God." 

Yet,  in  relation  to  this  subject,  the  Gospels 
afford  no  answer  to  questions  which  at  once  arise 
in  our  minds.  What  was  our  Lord's  mode  of  life 
during  the  interval  between  his  resurrection  and 
his  ascension  ]  Whither  did  he  retire  when  he  sep- 
arated from  his  disciples  I  These,  indeed,  are  ques- 
tions which  the  Evangelists  might  not  have  been 
able  to  answer.  But  there  are  others,  in  respect 
to  which,  had  they  anticipated  the  curiosity  of 
readers  of  after-times,  they  would  have  been  able 
to  satisfy  it.  After  his  several  appearances  to  his 
disciples,  in  what  manner  did  he  leave  them1? 


108  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

Why  did  none  of  them  attempt  to  follow  him  ] 
At  least,  in  regard  to  the  circumstances  attending 
his  departure  after  his  various  interviews  with 
them,  they  co,uld  have  given  us  satisfactory  infor- 
mation. But,  with  the  exception  of  the  fact,  that 
at  his  last  interview  he  was  separated  from  them 
by  his  ascension,  there  is  nothing  in  their  nar- 
ratives which  throws  any  light  on  the  subject. 

What  follows  from  all  this]  It  follows,  that, 
in  the  narratives  of  the  Evangelists  concerning  the 
appearances  of  our  Lord,  we  have  not  all  that  was 
originally  told.  The  circumstances  which  the 
Apostles  and  other  immediate  disciples  of  our 
Lord  could  not  but  know,  but  which  are  not  re- 
lated in  the  Gospels,  must  have  been  matters  of 
curiosity  and  interest  to  their  early  converts  ;  and 
it  would  be  idle  to  suppose  that  they  withheld 
that  information  concerning  them  which  they  were 
able  to  give. 

It  may  here  be  observed,  that  the  supposition 
that  the  accounts  of  the  appearances  given  by  the 
Evangelists  are  not  true,  is  altogether  set  a'side  by 
the  unfinished  form  in  which  they  appear.  No 
fabricated  stories,  whether  the  product  of  inten- 
tional deception,  or  qf  a  self-deluding  imagination 
working  on  traditional  stories,  would  have  been 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       109 

left  in  such  a  state  of  unsatisfactory  incomplete- 
ness. 

But  if  the  Gospels  are  not  regular  histories,  — 
if  the  Evangelists  assumed  that  their  readers 
already  possessed  a  knowledge  of  the  main  facts 
respecting  our  Lord's  ministry,  and  even  of  partic- 
ular circumstances  in  his  history,  —  what,  then,  is 
their  character]  For  what  purpose  were  they 
written  1  The  answer  I  conceive  to  be  this.  Such 
a  series  of  events  as  constituted  and  accompanied 
the  ministry  of  Jesus  could  not  have  taken  place 
without  giving  rise  to  a  great  number  of  re- 
ports, false  as  well  as  true.  Its  true  history  was 
given  by  the  Apostles  and  their  associates,  but 
their  converts  had  heard,  or  were  exposed  to  hear, 
much  that  was  not  true,  —  falsehoods  proceeding 
from  the  enemies  of  Jesus,  and  misstatements  and 
fables  having  their  origin  among  his  ill-informed 
followers.  In  this  state  of  things  it  became  neces- 
sary from  these  numerous  relations  to  separate,  to 
collect  together,  and  to  authenticate  by  the  highest 
authority,  a  portion  at  least  of  those  more  impor- 
tant facts  which  determined  that  his  ministry  was 
from  God,  and  afforded  the  most  striking  illustra- 
tions of  its  character.  This  was  done  by  the 

Evangelists.     Every  one  of  them,  I  believe,  might 
10 


110  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

have  explained  his  purpose  in  language  corre- 
sponding to  that  used  by  Luke  (i.  4) :  "I  have  writ- 
ten, ....  that  you  may  know  the  truth  concerning 
the  relations  >  which  you  have  heard  "  ;  *  or  might 
have  adopted  the  words  of  John  (xx.  30,  31): 
"  Many  other  miracles,  indeed,  did  Jesus  perform 
before  his  disciples,  which  have  not  been  written 
in  this  book;  but  these  have  been  written,  that 
you  may  believe  Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah,  the  Son 
of  God ;  and  that,  believing,  you  may  have  life 
through  him." 

THUS,  as  I  conceive,  it  is  to  the  circumstances 
under  which  the  Gospels  were  written,  and  which 
led  to  their  composition,  that  they  owe,  in  part, 
their  imperfect  and  fragmentary  character;  but 
this  is  due  in  great  part,  also,  to  the  want  of  skill 
in  the  Evangelists  as  literary  artists. 

In  regard  to  the  criticism  of  the  Gospels,  it  is 
constantly  to  be  kept  in  mind,  that  this  want  of 
literary  skill  in  their  authors  appears  not  merely 
in  the  construction  of  their  histories,  but  equally 
in  their  use  of  language.  Their  vocabulary  was 

*  Such  I  conceive  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  original.  See  Evi- 
dences of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  I.  pp.  clxxi,  clxxii, 
note. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  Ill 

very  limited,  and  hence  the  action  of  their  minds 
was  constrained.  They  had  no  command  and 
choice  of  expression,  and,  at  the  same  time,  were 
called  upon  to  communicate  ideas,  sentiments,  and 
modes  of  thought,  with  which  the  generality  of  their 
contemporaries  had  been  wholly  unacquainted. 
The  difficulty  they  found  in  writing  caused  them 
to  narrate  briefly  and  imperfectly,  omitting  con- 
necting thoughts  and  explanatory  circumstances ; 
and  their  want  of  familiarity  with  the  use  of  lan- 
guage not  unfrequently  led  them  to  employ  forms 
of  speech  which  are  evidently  not  the  precise  logi- 
cal expression  of  the  meaning  intended. 

THE  Gospels,  then,  in  their  construction  and  in 
their  style,  correspond  throughout  to  the  character 
and  circumstances  of  the  writers  to  whom  they  are 
ascribed.  They  bear  with  them  indelible  proofs 
of  their  genuineness. 

BUT  it  is  obvious  that  books  of  the  character 
described  must  be  very  open  to  the  attacks  of 
minute  criticism,  and  exposed  to  many  cavils  in 
which  there  is  no  weight.  A  story  when  told  by 
one  imperfectly  skilled  in  the  art  of  narration  often 
suggests  objections,  and  presents  seeming  improb- 


112  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

abilities,  which  may  be  easily  removed  by  expla- 
nation. Every  one  must  have  observed  how,  in 
such  a  case,  what  at  first  appeared  obscure  or 
doubtful  is  at  once  cleared  up  by  the  answers  to  a 
few  questions ;  or  how  even  the  statement  of  a 
single  circumstance,  with  which  we  were  before 
unacquainted,  may  throw  light  on  all  that  per- 
plexed us.  But  as  we  cannot  interrogate  the 
Evangelists,  we  must,  as  regards  them,  answer 
our  questions  ourselves ;  and  our  answers  are  to 
be  derived,  as  I  have  before  explained,  from  a 
wide  range  of  knowledge  and  of  thought. 

In  proportion  as  we  have  more  just  concep- 
tions of  the  character  and  condition  of  the  Evan- 
gelists, and  are  better  acquainted  with  the  state  of 
things  under  which  they  wrote,  so  will  difficulties 
and  obscurities  disappear,  and  their  writings  become 
clear  to  us.  In  proportion  as  one  is  deficient  in 
this  requisite  knowledge,  or  in  the  comprehension 
and  judgment  necessary  to  make  use  of  it,  or  in 
the  disposition  to  apply  it,  so  will  he  be  able  to 
raise  cavils  and  objections. 

If  the  Gospels  be  of  such  a  character  as  I  have 
described,  they  must  present  many  difficulties.  1 
do  not  here  mean  by  that  word  passages  affording 
any  well-founded  objection  to  their  authenticity, 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE   GOSPELS.  113 

but  passages  requiring  to  be  explained  for  the  gen- 
erality of  readers.  In  all  ancient  classical  histories, 
and  in  the  other  writings  which  have  come  down 
to  us  from  Greece  and  Rome,  there  are  many  such 
difficulties.  The  explanation  of  them  has  given 
occasion  to  that  vast  body  of  direct  and  indirect 
commentaries  on  these  writings,  which  includes  all 
those  books  which  treat  of  the  Greek  and  Roman 
antiquities,  language,  literature,  and  philosophy. 

But  beside  the  difficulties  in  the  Gospels,  of  the 
nature  just  represented,  there  are,  as  in  all  other 
histories,  errors, — misapprehensions  of  the  meaning 
of  language,  and  mistakes  in  regard  to  facts.  But 
as  difficulties  of  the  former  class  are,  from  the  char- 
acter of  the  Gospels,  more  likely  to  occur  in  them 
than  in  most  ancient  histories,  so,  on  the  other  hand, 
we  believe  that  important  difficulties  of  the  latter 
class,  or,  in  other  words,  important  errors  concern- 
ing the  history  of  our  Lord's  public  ministry,  are 
less  likely  to- occur,  because,  in  relation  to  the  facts 
of  this  history,  we  believe  the  Evangelists  to  have 
been  well-informed  and  thoroughly  honest  relators. 

THE  character  of  the  Gospels,  such  as  it  has 
been  represented,  is  one  mode  in  which  it  has 

pleased  God  to  preserve  to  us,  in  the  very  books 
10* 


114  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

themselves,  evidence  of  their  authenticity.  It  ap- 
pears, that,  in  order  to  understand  them,  we  must 
be  acquainted  with  many  facts  which  they  do  not 
state;  that  we  must  bring  to  bear  on  their  ex- 
planation many  considerations  which  they  do  not 
expressly  present.  Parallel  with  what  the  Evan- 
gelists relate,  there  existed  a  state  of  things  which 
they  do  not  bring  into  view.  Results  not  narrated 
by  them  must  have  been  consequent  on  what  they 
do  narrate.  Circumstances  which  they  have  not 
placed  before  us  must  have  given  occasion  to  much 
that  was  said  and  done  by  our  Lord,  and  must  have 
affected,  throughout,  the  course  of  his  ministry. 
Of  the  histories  which  they  have  written,  there  is 
an  unwritten  counterpart.  Between  the  two  there 
is  such  correspondence,  that,  in  order  to  understand 
what  is  written,  we  must  make  a  study  of  the 
unwritten.  This  correspondence  becomes  more 
striking  in  proportion  to  the  correctness  and  clear- 
ness of  our  apprehension  of  that  state  of  things 
which  was  coexistent  with  the  events  recorded  in 
the  Gospels.  The  relations  between  what  is  told 
and  what  is  not  told  become  more  apparent.  All 
the  knowledge  which  we  can  bring  to  bear  on  the 
history  of  Jesus  as  given  by  the  Evangelists,  goes 
to  confirm  its  essential  truth.  The  case  would  be 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       115 

the  very  reverse,  if  this  history  were  false.  Then, 
in  prosecuting  our  inquiries,  instead  of  continually 
discovering  new  proofs  of  its  authenticity,  we 
should  continually  discover  new  proofs  of  its  false- 
hood. Nothing  but  truth  could  bear  the  test 
which  we  have  it  in  our  power  to  apply.  Such  is 
the  character  of  the  Gospels,  such  is  their  defi- 
ciency of  information,  their  imperfection  and  in- 
completeness, that  they  are  necessarily  complicated 
with  a  great  body  of  circumstantial  evidence  of 
the  most  unsuspicious  kind.  Thus,  what  we  might 
consider  as  their  defects,  what  are  their  defects 
when  regarded  merely  as  literary  compositions, 
contribute  greatly  to  enhance  their  value. 

BUT  this,  one  may  say,  is  not  the  view  of  the 
Gospels  commonly  given.  —  It  is  not.  It  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  view  of  their  character  presented 
by  any  established  church,  or  by  any  writer  hold- 
ing the  traditionary  opinions  concerning  them, 
whether  more  or  less  distinctly.  It  is  altogether 
inconsistent  with  the  neglected  state  in  which  the 
Gospels  have  been  left  for  popular  use,  —  for 
the  use  of  all  who  are  not  theological  scholars. 
Through  this  neglect,  we  who  speak  the  English 
language  now  read  them  in  a  translation  in  which 


116        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

their  meaning  is  often  mistaken,  and  often,  when  not 
absolutely  misunderstood,  improperly  expressed, 
—  in  which  the  great  simplicity  of  the  Evan- 
gelists (one  of  the  most  decisive  marks  of  their 
truth)  is  disguised  by  a  stiff  and  solemn  style,  as 
much  as  the  Evangelists  themselves  would  have 
been  disguised,  if,  putting  off  the  dress  of  their 
times,  they  had  clothed  themselves  in  the  vest- 
ments of  a  modern  priest ;  —  in  a  translation  of 
which  the  phraseology  is  in  part  antiquated,  and 
in  part  such  as  wras  equally  improper  in  former 
days  as  at  present,  and  which,  in  aiming  at  a 
verbal  rendering,  retains  what  are  mere  idioms 
of  the  original  language,  without  force  or  propri- 
ety in  our  own.  Even  the  mechanical  aid  to  a 
right  understanding  of  the  Gospels  to  be  derived 
from  a  proper  division  of  their  contents  in  print- 
ing, so  as  to  separate  from  one  another  those 
portions  which  relate  to  different  topics  or  different 
occasions,  is  not  afforded  in  the  copies  published 
by  authority.  On  the  contrary,  the  divisions  made 
are  such  as  not  to  guide,  but  to  mislead,  the  un- 
learned and  inattentive  reader.  Were  all  this 
reformed,  a  veil  would  be  removed  which  now 
obscures  and  distorts  their  meaning. 

The  same  causes  —  whatever  they  are  —  which 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  117 

have  operated  to  deprive  the  great  majority  of  the 
Christian  community  in  every  country  of  that 
means  of  understanding  the  Gospels  which  would 
be  afforded  by  a  translation  corresponding  to  the 
original  as  nearly  as  the  difference  of  languages 
permits,  have  presented  an  equal  obstacle  to  com- 
municating to  the  generality  of  readers  correct 
notions  of  their  character,  and  of  the  manner  in 
which  they  ought  to  be  regarded.  The  action  of 
these  causes  has  kept  back  from  popular  use  a 
knowledge  of  the  true  character  of  the  Gospels, 
and  of  that  great  variety  of  facts  and  considerations 
by  which  they  are  illustrated  and  their  truth  con- 
firmed. It  is  true,  that,  from  the  vast  number  of 
works  which  directly  or  indirectly  relate  to  the 
Gospels,  a  great  amount  of  important  information, 
and  very  many  explanations  and  suggestions,  are 
to  be  derived  by  the  theological  student.  But  the 
most  important  of  these  works  require  so  much 
preparatory  knowledge  in  order  that  they  may  be 
used  at  all,  or  used  with  advantage,  many  of  them 
have  so  repulsive  a  character,  and  most  of  them 
are  founded  on  such  false  conceptions  of  Christian- 
ity and  of  the  Gospels,  that,  as  regards  the  gen- 
erality of  Christians,  all  inquiry  is  discouraged,  or, 
if  pursued,  there  is  danger  of  its  becoming  un- 
profitable, if  not  worse  than  unprofitable. 


118        INTEENAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

The  general  want  of  that  information  concern- 
ing the  Gospels  which  ought  to  be  the  common 
property  of  Christians,  has  caused  the  whole  sub- 
ject of  our  religion  to  be  involved  in  obscurity, 
perplexity,  and  error.  This  ignorance  has  not 
been  confined  to  the  laity,  —  who  have  commonly 
been  regarded  as  excused  from  any  study  of  the 
character  or  the  evidences  of  their  professed  or 
nominal  faith,  —  but  has  likewise  extended  over 
a  very  large  portion  of  those  who  have  assumed 
to  be  teachers  of  Christianity.  The  faith  of  the 
generality  of  men  has  rested  on  traditionary  au- 
thority. Beside  the  influence  of  this  authority, 
the  weight  of  the  external  evidences  of  Christian- 
ity, the  essential  principles  of  its  morality,  based 
on  the  immortal  nature  of  man,  and  the  intrinsic 
character  of  the  Gospels,  which  cannot  be  wholly 
obscured,  have  undoubtedly  made  many  men  Chris- 
tians, but  often  with  a  wavering  faith,  and  with 
very  imperfect  or  very  erroneous  conceptions  of 
Christianity.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  neglect, 
or  the  inability,  or  the  unwillingness,  to  communi- 
cate that  knowledge  to  the  great  body  of  Christians 
which  would  place  the  history  of  our  religion  in 
clear  day,  but  would  at  the  same  time  place  in  as 
broad  a  light  the  superstitions  and  false  doctrines 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE   GOSPELS.  119 

that  have  been  represented  as  essential  to  Chris- 
tianity, has  left  the  misunderstood  Gospels  exposed 
defenceless  to  the  attacks  of  unbelievers.  If  those 
truths  concerning  them  which  may  be  clearly  es- 
tablished were  generally  known  and  recognized, 
works  like  that  of  Strauss  could  hardly  be  pro- 
duced. If  produced,  they  wrould  fall  at  once  to 
their  proper  level.  They  would  be  classed  with 
such  writings  as  those  of  one  of  his  countrymen 
(Professor  Samuel  Simon  Witte),  who,  in  the  last 
quarter  of  the  eighteenth  century,  maintained  that 
the  Pyramids  and  the  rums  of  Persepolis,  Palmyra, 
and  Baalbec  were  natural  productions,  the  result 
of  volcanic  agency. 

It  is  by  the  prevailing  ignorance  of  which  I  have 
spoken,  and  by  the  inveterate  errors  which  have 
come  down  to  us  from  ages  more  ignorant  than 
our  own,  and  the  consequent  outbreak  of  modern 
extravagances  occasioned  by  the  free  action  of 
men's  minds  having  been  so  long  constrained,  that 
he  who  would  explain  the  character,  and  make 
evident  the  divine  origin  of  Christianity,  is  prin- 
cipally embarrassed.  Undoubtedly,  among  those, 
throughout  the  small  body  of  theological  scholars, 
who  have  given  their  thoughts  to  the  study  of  our 
faith,  there  has  been  a  great  advance  in  religious 


120  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF   THE 

knowledge,  and  consequently  in  correct  concep- 
tions of  Christianity,  since  the  beginning  of  the  last 
century.  In  going  back  from  century  to  century, 
to  an  era  preceding  the  Protestant  Reformation,  we 
find  the  same  gradual  change  for  the  better.  This 
is  ground  for  encouragement,  and  for  the  hope  of  a 
brighter  period.  Were  it  not  for  this  retrospect  of 
the  past,  the  view  before  us  and  around  us  would 
be  gloomy.  When  we  see  the  vast  power  of  prej- 
udice opposed  to  the  truth,  — the  sacred  authority 
with  which  antiquated  errors  are  invested,  —  the 
obstinacy  with  which  the  dead  formulae  of  barbar- 
ous creeds,  the  leavings  of  mortality  and  decay, 
are  still  set  forth,  like  the  relics  of  a  Catholic  saint, 
as  having  power  to  give  health  and  life,  —  and  the 
strong  influence  acting  on  the  love  of  wealth  and 
rank  which  determines  or  affects  the  professed 
belief  of  a  great  number  of  men,  even  of  the  pub- 
lic teachers  of  religion,  in  the  Christian  world ;  — 
when  we  look  at  the  state  of  things  existing  in 
the  established  church  of  one  of  the  most  enlight- 
ened Christian  nations,  a  nation  so  intimately 
connected  with  our  own,  —  we  might  well  feel  dis- 
couraged, were  it  not  for 

"  the  deep  voice  from  the  past, 
Which  tells  us  these  things  cannot  last." 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       121 

I  LEAVE  the  preceding  paragraph  as  it  was 
originally  written.  But  since  it  was  written,  the 
news  has  burst  upon  us  of  that  almost  simultane- 
ous development  of  moral  force  that  has  been  for 
a  long  time  accumulating,  which  is  now  rapidly 
and  irrevocably  changing  the  aspect  of  Europe. 
It  has  become  evident,  that,  throughout  the  more 
enlightened  portion  of  the  Old  World,  traditionary 
institutions  and  obsolete  creeds,  unsuited  to  the 
present  age,  must  fall.  The  prejudices  on  which 
they  have  rested  are  decayed,  and  have  grown  too 
weak  for  their  support.  They  must  fall,  if  not 
before  the  reason,  yet  before  the  passions  and  the 
altered  feelings,  of  those  on  whom  they  have  been 
imposed ;  and  the  same  abuses  and  errors  cannot 
be  restored.  The  struggle  which  has  commenced, 
sudden  as  may  seem  its  first  outbreak,  has  been 
preparing  through  many  years  by  the  progress  of 
men's  thoughts  and  convictions.  It  may  be  obsti- 
nate and  long,  many  mistakes  may  be  committed, 
much  folly,  much  wickedness,  and  much  suffering 
may  accompany  it;  but,  whatever  doubts  there 
may  be  of  its  final  result  as  regards  the  happiness 
of  our  race,  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  will  sweep 
away  many  evils  by  which  civilized  Europe  has 

been  afflicted,  and  into  which  a  new  vitality  can- 
11 


122  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

not  hereafter  be  infused.  This  struggle  is  not  the 
commencement  of  a  series  of  events  corresponding 
to  those  which  the  last  sixty  years  have  witnessed. 
Men  are  starting  anew  from  a  more  advanced  state 
of  intellectual  and  moral  culture.  Their  physical 
condition  has  also  been  improved.  The  wants  and 
sufferings  of  the  less  favored  portion  of  our  race 
have  been  gaining  more  and  more  attention  from 
those  to  whom  the  power  to  alleviate  them  has 
been  afforded  by  the  providence  of  God  manifest- 
ed in  the  necessary  order  of  things  which  he  has 
established  in  this  world  and  by  which  men  are 
bound  together.  The  ferocious  passions  of  the 
many  have  not  been  maddened  as  they  had  been 
sixty  years  ago  by  direct  and  open  oppression, 
habitual  injury  and  contempt ;  nor  has  the  intel- 
lect of  the  more  enlightened  been  insulted  and 
exasperated  through  the  imposition  of  absurd 
creeds,  and  the  maintenance  of  intolerable  abuses, 
under  the  name  of  religion.  We  cannot  doubt 
that  the  aged  survivors  of  the  next  half-century 
will  have  witnessed  changes  as  great  and  as  start- 
ling as  those  which  have  stamped  their  character 
on  the  period  through  which  we  have  just  passed, 
but  changes  of  another  kind.  Men  will  not  again 
run  the  same  cycle.  There  seems  to  be  no  ground 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       123 

for  fear  or  for  hope,  should  any  be  disposed  to  en- 
tertain such  hope,  that  a  new  reaction  will  take 
place  strong  enough  to  carry  men  back  to  the 
same  causes  of  evil  from  which  they  are  now 
struggling  to  free  themselves. 

But  this  anticipation  of  coming  changes  affords 
in  itself  alone  no  augury  of  good.  The  restlessness 
and  the  convulsions  of  nations  are  in  themselves 
no  more  favorable  indications  of  improvement  than 
the  tossings  and  spasmodic  motions  of  a  man  in  a 
fever  are  symptoms  of  returning  health.  It  is 
with  nations  as  with  the  individuals  of  whom  they 
are  composed.  It  is  only  through  means  which 
may  raise  the  moral  and  intellectual  character  of 
men,  that  their  permanent  good  may  be  effected. 
It  can  be  effected  only  through  the  influence  of 
those  principles  of  action  which  control  our  self- 
ishness, and  call  forth  our  social  affections ;  — 
only  through  a  better  knowledge  and  a  deeper 
feeling  of  the  truths  which  concern  our  relations 
to  our  fellow-men  as  founded  on  our  relations  to 
God  and  to  immortality,  and  which  lead  us  by 
the  highest  motives  to  the  performance  of  our 
duties. 

When,  accordingly,  we  reflect,  I  do  not  say  on 
the  passions,  but  on  the  motives  to  action,  which 


124       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

govern  the  majority  of  men ;  on  the  virtual  irre- 
ligion  which  is  prevalent  even  under  the  profession 
of  religion ;  on  the  merely  outward  and  ceremoni- 
ous respect  for  some  established  form  of  national 
worship;  on  the  wild  speculations  which  appear 
in  the  writings  of  so  many,  who,  from  their  po- 
litical station  or  their  great  intellectual  powers, 
control  directly  or  indirectly  the  minds  of  their 
fellow-men;  on  the  infidelity  and  atheism,  made 
only  the  more  offensive  by  pretending  to  use  the 
language  of  religion,  which  have  found  favor  in 
our  age  as  the  highest  philosophy ;  on  the  general 
absence  of  a  recognition  of  the  influence  of  men's 
opinions  and  religious  belief  in  determining  their 
character  and  conduct,  and,  in  consequence  of  this, 
the  general  insensibility  to  the  value  of  truth  and 
to  the  mischief  of  error  on  the  most  important 
topics  of  thought,  or,  in  other  words,  the  common 
indifference  as  to  what  is  essentially  true  or  essen- 
tially false  concerning  Christianity ;  —  when  we 
consider  these  things,  we  may  perceive  that  other 
influences,  very  unlike  those  which  are  now  agitat- 
ing the  surface  of  society,  influences  working  far 
deeper  in  the  nature  of  man,  are  required  to  pro- 
duce any  great  and  permanent  good  for  our  race. 
We  may  hope,  —  we  may  believe,  —  that  the  pres- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       125 

ent  state  of  things  is  preparing  the  way  for  the 
more  unobstructed  action  of  these  influences  at 
some  distant  period.  Christianity,  though  mis- 
understood and  misrepresented,  neglected  and  ca- 
lumniated, has  been  the  great  civilizer  of  the 
world ;  and  it  is  to  Christianity  better  understood 
than  it  has  been,  that  we  must  continue  to  look 
for  all  essential  improvement  in  the  character  and 
condition  of  individuals,  and  consequently  of  na- 
tions. 


11* 


126       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 


CHAPTER    V. 

ON  WHAT  ESSENTIALLY  CONSTITUTES  THE  VALUE  OF  CHRIS- 
TIANITY AND   OF  THE  GOSPELS. 

I  HAVE  spoken  in  the  last  Chapter  of  some  of 
the  characteristics  of  the  Gospels.  One  requisite 
necessary  to  complete  our  view  of  their  character  — 
one  requisite  the  most  important  —  remains  to  be 
mentioned.  We  must  have  a  correct  apprehension 
of  what  essentially  constitutes  their  value ;  and  to 
this  end  we  must  have  a  correct  apprehension  of 
what  essentially  constitutes  the  value  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

The  Gospels  are  the  history  of  a  miraculous 
communication  from  God  to  men.  If  this  history 
be  true,  it  relates  to  an  event  of  inconceivable  in- 
terest and  importance.  The  Infinite  Being  has 
suspended  the  ordinary  operations  of  his  power  to 
manifest  himself  more  immediately  to  the  dwellers 
on  earth.  The  essential  value  of  Christianity  con- 
sists in  its  being  such  a  revelation  of  Him.  When 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  127 

we  inquire  respecting  the  truth  of  Christianity,  the 
only  question  at  issue  is,  whether  it  be  a  fact,  that 
God,  through  Christ,  miraculously  revealed  him- 
self to  men.  Let  us  consider  why  this  fact  is  so 
important. 

One  answer  is  obvious.  If  God  has  thus  re- 
vealed his  existence  and  his  purposes  towards  us, 
the  truths  of  religion  rest  on  an  immovable  basis, 
—  the  witness  of  God  himself.  This  needs  no 
illustration.  But  there  is  another  answer,  which 
has  been  less  considered.  It  is  only  through  such 
a  supernatural  manifestation  of  God  that  these 
truths  can  be  known.  This  admits  of  explana- 
tion. 

In  proof  of  the  proposition  just  stated,  we  need 
not  appeal  to  the  ignorance,  the  errors,  the  uncer- 
tainty, and  the  very  limited  conceptions  of  the 
wisest  of  heathen  philosophers.  We  will  put 
aside  the  whole  of  that  decisive  evidence  to  be  de- 
rived from  our  knowledge  of  the  condition  of  men 
unenlightened  by  Christianity.  We  may  consider 
the  proposition  in  the  abstract,  not  referring  to 
what  experience  has  determined  concerning  it,  but 
regarding  directly  the  actual  powers  of  the  human 
mind,  and  what  in  the  nature  of  things  must  be 
true. 


128        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

What  can  human  reason  alone,  when  strongest 
and  most  unembarrassed  in  its  action,  effect  toward 
establishing  the  facts  on  which  religion  is  founded  1 
Our  reason  may  assure  us  of  the  truth  that  there 
is  an  infinite  cause  of  all  finite  things.  All  expe- 
rience teaches  us  that  every  thing  finite,  all  motion, 
all  organized  life,  all  changes,  must  have  a  cause 
for  their  existence.  We  have  no  experience,  and 
therefore  we  have  no  belief,  that  a  body  of  what 
we  call  matter  can  come  into  existence  uncreated. 
The  weight  of  this  universal  experience  is  so  deci- 
sive, that  the  conviction  derived  from  it  has  been 
commonly  regarded  as  an  innate  law  of  the  mind. 
But  the  truth  that  finite  things  cannot  exist  with- 
out a  cause,  leads  us  directly  to  the  conclusion 
that  there  is  an  Infinite  Being,  who  is  the  cause  of 
all  finite  things,  —  the  Creator  of  the  Universe. 

What  indications,  then,  do  our  very  brief  expe- 
rience, and  our  most  imperfect  knowledge  of  the 
objects  around  us,  and  of  the  state  of  things  in 
which  we  are  existing,  afford  us  of  the  character 
of  the  Cause  of  all  things  ]  The  phenomena  we 
are  able  to  observe,  the  series  of  what  we  call 
causes  and  effects,  may  satisfy  our  reason  of  his 
intelligence  and  benevolence.  Our  conclusion  in 
regard  to  the  moral  character  of  God  is  confirmed 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  129 

by  the  fact,  that  we  neither  know,  nor  can  conceive 
of,  any  cause  of  moral  evil  except  the  selfish  desires 
of  finite  beings.  These  indeed  have  been  ascribed 
to  the  Deity  in  those  false  systems  of  theology 
which  represent  him  as  having  created  the  uni- 
verse for  his  own  glory.  But  we  are  not  speaking 
of  what  superstition  has  taught,  but  of  what  our 
reason,  unassisted  by  revelation,  may  be  conceived 
of  as  capable  of  teaching. 

The  Infinite  Being,  then,  is  intelligent  and  be- 
nevolent. But  we  can  imagine  no  limitation  to 
the  essential  attributes  of  such  a  being.  We 
conceive,  therefore,  that  his  intelligence  and  be- 
nevolence are  infinite,  in  the  whole  extent  of  the 
meaning  of  that  term  which  we  are  able  to  com- 
prehend. 

Furthermore.  This  Being  we  can  conceive  of 
only  as  unchangeable.  The  Source  of  all  power 
can  be  affected  by  no  power  from  without.  No 
new  motive  of  action  derived  from  temporal  and 
finite  things  can  influence  Him  who  is  the  Author 
of  all  things  temporal  and  finite,  and  to  whose  in- 
finite intelligence  they  have  ever  been  present. 

Thus  we  have  arrived  at  a  conception,  of  the 
truth  of  which  I  believe  that  it  is  possible  for  our 
reason  alone  to  give  us  assurance.  But  I  here 


130  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

use  the  word  "  possible "  to  denote  merely  that 
which  may  be  supposed  without  supposing  what 
in  the  nature  of  things  is  an  absurdity.  There  is 
no  evidence  >  that  such  a  conception  of  God  has 
been  entertained  by  the  wisest  of  men  unenlight- 
ened by  Christianity,  though  it  is  not  to  be 
questioned  that  a  few  such  men  have  made  some 
approach  towards  it. 

To  this  conclusion,  then,  our  reason  may  have 
attained.  But  before  this  conclusion  she  stands 
utterly  confounded.  She  has  arrived  at  a  concep- 
tion which  she  cannot  comprehend.  Putting  aside 
all  our  imperfect  and  contradictory  notions  of  in- 
finity and  eternity,*  and  of  an  Unchangeable  Being 
whose  successive  volitions  cause  all  changes,  no- 
tions which  she  has  no  power  to  reconcile,  other 
questions  at  once  present  themselves  which  she 
cannot  answer,  —  difficulties  which  she  cannot 
solve.  She  has  risen  into  an  immeasurable  ex- 
panse of  light,  in  which  all  sensible  things  melt 
away  into  mere  manifestations  of  the  Infinite 
Spirit ;  but  it  is  an  expanse  of  light  by  which  she 
is  overwhelmed  and  bewildered.  No  power  of 


*  See  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  n.  p. 
cxcvii,  seq. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  131 

distinct  vision  remains.  No  countenance  mani- 
fests itself  to  her  from  the  unfathomable  glory. 
No  articulate  voice  issues  forth.  The  light  is 
mute. 

In  contemplating  the  relations  of  God  to  finite 
beings,  our  reason,  when  untaught  and  unguided 
by  God  himself,  utterly  fails  us.  In  attempt- 
ing to  explore  this  subject,  she  proceeds  stum- 
bling, uncertain,  disheartened,  meeting  on  every 
side  with  barriers  which  she  cannot  pass.  God 
is  infinitely  benevolent.  Why,  then,  one  may 
ask,  am  I  a  suffering  being  in  a  world  full  of 
suffering,  where  moral  and  physical  evils  often 
present  themselves  in  forms  so  appalling  1  —  God 
is  infinitely  benevolent.  Of  this  we  are  assured. 
But  numberless  beings  are  but  just  beginning  to 
exist.  Numberless  inferior  animals  around  us 
have  been  formed  with  but  very  limited  capacities 
of  happiness,  if  happiness  it  may  be  called.  There 
are  to  our  perceptions  immeasurable  voids  in  the 
universe,  containing  no  created  life.  Why  have 
not  all  time  and  space  been  filled  with  happy 
beings  ]  —  God  is  an  agent.  This  is  certain.  His 
power  is  in  continual  action,  forming,  sustaining, 
and  moving  all  things.  But  we  can  conceive  of 
no  action  of  any  conscious  being  without  a  motive. 


132  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

And  we  can  conceive  of  no  motive  which  does 
not  consist  in  the  purpose  of  improving  one's 
condition  through  the  gratification  of  some  unsat- 
isfied desire. '  And  no  such  motive  can  be  ascribed 
to  the  Infinite  Being.  —  God  is  the  source  of  all 
power ;  he  has  formed  our  natures ;  he  has  formed 
and  disposed  all  things  that  act  upon  them.  How 
is  it,  that  I  am  not  merely  a  passive  instrument  in 
his  hands  ?  How  is  it,  that  there  is  inseparably 
connected  with  my  nature  a  conviction  that  I  can 
act  for  myself,  that  I  can  choose  good  and  avoid 
evil,  and  that  the  consequent  sense  of  responsibil- 
ity becomes  a  source  of  unhappiness  and  misery, 
when  I  feel  that  I  have  chosen  ill  ?  In  what  re- 
spect does  the  uncontrollable  power  of  God  differ 
from  an  inexorable  Fate,  consigning,  if  not  myself, 
yet  many  of  my  fellow-creatures,  to  sin  and  misery  1 
Certainly  the  difference  is  not  to  be  established 
through  such  expedients  as  are  resorted  to  by  those 
who  maintain  that  this  uncontrollable  power,  the 
ultimate  cause  of  all  finite  things,  is  indeed  incon- 
sistent with  the  moral  power  of  man  to  choose 
between  good  and  evil.  But  how  are  these  things 
to  be  explained  and  reconciled  ? 

These  difficulties,  more  or  less  clearly  perceived, 
have   in  all  times,  and  more  particularly  in  our 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  133 

own,  spread  the  darkness  of  atheism  over  what  has 
been  called  philosophy ;  —  for,  at  the  present  day, 
the  belief  that  no  such  doctrine  as  atheism  exists 
can  be  held  only  by  a  very  ill-informed  and  very 
innocent  person.  I  have  stated  these  difficulties 
that  the  subject  may  be  fully  apprehended;  so 
that  he  who  thus  apprehends  it  may  not  be  taken 
unawares,  when  he  finds  them  put  forth  by  others, 
or  when  they  rise  spontaneously  before  his  own 
mind.  I  have  stated  them  for  another  purpose, 
that  we  may  fully  recognize  what  ought  to  be  recog- 
nized as  a  fundamental  principle  by  all  who  under- 
take to  speculate  on  the  highest  truths,  the  truths 
of  religion,  —  that  man's  reason  is  very  limited. 
All  that  by  its  unassisted  exercise  we  know  or  can 
know  concerning  the  condition  of  God's  creatures 
in  this  world,  or  his  relations  to  his  creatures  gen- 
erally or  to  the  universe,  bears  a  far  less  propor- 
tion to  what,  in  our  present  state,  we  cannot  thus 
know,  than  do  the  objects  which  we  may  discern 
by  the  light  of  a  taper  in  a  narrow  room  to  what 
we  may  behold  when  the  midnight  sky  opens 
above  us,  with  its  numberless  worlds  of  light 
spreading  through  the  immeasurable  and  unimag- 
inable distance.  With  this  just,  and  consequently 

most  humble,  view  of  our  native  powers,  we  shall 
12 


134        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

form  a  proper  estimate  of  those  pretended  systems 
of  the  highest  philosophy,  which,  rejecting  all  that 
God  has  revealed  to  us,  and  renouncing  even  the 
clearest  deductions  of  our  own  reason  concerning 
his  being  and  perfections,  have  been  in  reality  in- 
coherent and  unintelligible  dreams  of  human  folly. 
But  all  the  difficulties  and  questions  which  I 
have  spoken  of,  or  to  which  I  have  alluded,  resolve 
themselves  into  one  great  question  of  the  deepest 
interest  to  us  all.  What  are  the  relations  of  the 
Infinite  Spirit  to  each  one  of  us  individually1?  Is 
it  possible  that  they  can  be  of  such  a  character, 
that,  in  the  imperfect  language  to  the  use  of  which 
we  are  compelled,  in  speaking  of  God,  by  our  in- 
adequate conceptions,  we  may  call  them  personal 
relations  I  Happiness  flows  forth  from  Him ;  nor 
can  we  reasonably  ascribe  any  other  purpose  than 
the  production  of  happiness  to  the  Author  of  all 
things.  But  is  my  happiness  as  an  individual  his 
care, — the  care  of  that  Being  on  whom  I  am  wholly 
dependent  1  I  have  been  but  just  introduced  by 
him  among  his  works.  If  God  regards  me  with 
benevolence,  and  his  benevolence  is  infinite,  why 
was  not  my  being  commensurate  with  his  own  ] 
And  why  am  I,  in  this  my  short  life  here,  exposed 
to  so  much  suffering'? 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  135 

We  speak  of  the  love  of  God  for  his  creatures. 
But  I  have  no  experience  of  love  except  that  of 
one  finite  being  for  another.  My  natural  powers 
enable  me  to  form  no  conception  of  any  other.  I 
love  because  there  exist  in  the  objects  of  my  love 
qualities  with  which  I  can  sympathize  and  the 
contemplation  of  which  gives  me  pleasure,  or  from 
the  gratification  afforded  by  the  exercise  of  the 
amiable  and  benevolent  affections,  by  the  perform- 
ance of  those  acts  to  which  they  lead,  and  by  the 
reciprocal  love  which  they  produce.  I  love  be- 
cause I  find  my  happiness  in  the  happiness  of 
others,  and  in  their  feelings  of  kindness  towards 
me.  But  I  can  attribute  no  such  motives  to  the 
Infinite  Being.  The  affections  which  bind  men 
together  cannot  be  ascribed  to  him. 

I  am  suffering  in  a  world  full  of  suffering.  My 
imagination,  or,  if  one  will,  my  reason,  may  put  be- 
fore me  the  conception  of  another  world  in  which 
suffering  does  not  exist.  I  may  not  object,  that 
for  me  to  attain  to  it  I  must  pass  through  a  fear- 
ful change ;  but  what  assurance  can  reason  alone 
give  me,  that  I  am  to  exist  in  that  better  world  ? 
She  may  teach  me  that  God  regards  the  sum  of 
happiness  in  the  universe ;  but  it  is  my  individ- 
ual happiness  about  which  I  inquire.  If  another 


136  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

being  is  to  take  my  place  in  that  world ;  or  if,  ac- 
cording to  a  doctrine  received  by  many,  utterly 
unintelligible  in  itself,  but  which  they  suppose 
themselves  to  understand,  my  spirit,  distinct  from 
my  consciousness,  is  to  animate  another  being,  — 
this  will  not  lessen  the  sum  of  happiness  in  the 
universe ;  —  but  what  does  that  doctrine  concern 
me  ]  Where  am  I  to  learn  that  God  cares  for  me 
as  an  individual  1 

From  one  source  only,  —  from  the  testimony  of 
God  himself.  The  answer  to  that  question  is 
given  by  his  supernatural  manifestation  of  himself 
through  Christ.  Through  him  he  has  addressed 
men,  individual  men,  as  his  creatures,  as  his  care, 
as  acting  and  suffering  here  under  his  continual 
providence,  in  preparation  for  an  immortal  exist- 
ence. 

But  in  supposing  such  a  revelation,  you  present, 
an  unbeliever  may  say,  ideas  which  I  cannot  com- 
prehend. You  bring  together  in  a  supposed  con- 
nection, which  is  impossible,  the  infinite  and  the 
finite.  You  blend  with  the  history  of  human 
events,  of  the  deeds  of  men,  what  you  would  have 
regarded  as  immediate  acts  of  God.  You  teach 
that  infinite  perfection  and  power  were  in  union 
with  human  imperfection  and  weakness,  for  the 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  137 

purpose  of  accomplishing  what  you  call  a  divine 
work.  You  represent  God  as  dissatisfied  with 
what  he  had  ordained,  and  interrupting  the  estab- 
lished course  of  things  in  order  to  amend  it.  You 
would  have  us  believe  that  the  Unchangeable  Be- 
ing did  so  change  as  to  interpose  at  a  particular 
time  in  this  world  of  ours,  and  operate  in  a  man- 
ner altogether  different  from  his  usual  laws  of 
action.  My  imagination  is  confounded,  and  my 
reason  revolts. 

I  have  in  what  precedes,  and  elsewhere,*  taken 
notice  of  the  erroneous  conceptions  on  which  such 
language  may  be  founded.  But  there  is  a  most 
important  truth  involved  in  it.  God's  miraculous 
revelation  of  himself  through  Christ  —  of  which 
it  has  been  a  fashion  with  many  in  our  times  to 
speak  so  foolishly  and  so  flippantly,  not  professing 
absolutely  to  disbelieve  it,  but  only  to  regard  it 
as  a  matter  of  indifference  whether  God  has  so 
revealed  himself  or  not  —  is  in  truth  the  most 
astonishing  fact  of  which  we  can  conceive,  and 
one  of  incomparably  greater  interest  to  us  than 
any  other  of  which  we  may  assure  ourselves.  Our 
imagination  may  well  be  overwhelmed  by  it,  but 

*  See  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  II.  p. 
cxcviii,  note. 

12* 


138        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

there  is  nothing  in  the  belief  of  it  to  offend  our 
reason. 

Our  reason  does  not  hesitate  to  admit  the  belief 
of  the  all-controlling,  unintermitted  agency  of  God 
throughout  the  universe,  in  all  that  surrounds  us 
and  in  ourselves.  It  assents  at  once  to  the  truth, 
that  the  Infinite  Being  is  everywhere  in  the  most 
intimate  connection  with  finite  things ;  all  finite 
things  being  but  manifestations  of  His  power,  and 
preserved  in  existence  by  Him.  Reason  embraces, 
as  if  it  were  a  deduction  of  her  own,  the  truth 
taught  by  Christianity,  that  the  perfect,  all-pervad- 
ing Spirit  of  God  is  continually  working  in  the 
midst  of  human  imperfection,  and  (to  use  the  only 
language  which  our  most  limited  apprehensions 
afford)  in  union  with  it,  for  the  production  of 
good.  To  one  who  acknowledges  the  existence 
and  agency  of  God,  the  fact  is  evident  and  admits 
of  no  dispute,  however  impossible  we  may  find  it 
to  reconcile  the  conceptions  which  it  brings  to- 
gether, that  the  Unchangeable  is  at  every  moment 
operating  to  produce  changes  in  his  works,  im- 
measurably exceeding  in  number  and  variety  any 
limit  to  which  our  imagination  can  extend.  As 
regards  the  supernatural  manifestation  of  God  to 
bring  about  a  new  state  of  things,  to  accomplish 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE  GOSPELS.  139 

one  of  those  innumerable  changes,  reason  finds  no 
difficulty  in  believing  that  Infinite  Power  may  act 
without  the  intervention  of  those  phenomena  which 
we  call  natural  causes.  She  perceives  that  the 
existence  of  these  causes  is  from  him,  and  that 
precedent  to  their  existence  he  must  have  so 
acted,  —  that  the  work  of  creation  is  a  miracle. 
The  fact  does  not  seem  to  have  been  generally 
recognized,  but  the  only  difficulty  which  presents 
itself  to  our  reason  in  relation  to  this  subject  is 
of  an  opposite  kind.  It  is  in  answering  the  ques- 
tion, why  the  Ultimate  Cause  of  all  things  has 
ordinarily  interposed  a  chain  of  finite  causes,  so 
called,  between  his  power  and  will,  and  the  effects 
which  it  is  his  purpose  to  produce. 

Our  misapprehensions,  and  incredulity  and  im- 
perfect belief,  concerning  God's  manifestation  of 
himself  through  Jesus  Christ,  arise  from  our  nar- 
row conceptions.  We  are  of  the  earth,  earthy. 
We  find  it  hard  to  raise  our  apprehensions  above 
it.  We  are  in  continual  danger  of  thinking  and 
feeling  as  if  we  had  been  here  always,  and  were  to 
remain  here  for  ever.  We  affect  to  be  philosophers, 
and  to  speculate  on  the  constitution  of  a  universe 
into  which  we  have  but  just  been  introduced ;  but 
our  unaided  speculations  are  drawn  downwards 


140  INTEKNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

toward  the  earth,  and,  for  the  most  part,  only  carry 
us  into  the  region  of  its  smoke  and  exhalations. 
The  objects  immediately  about  us,  of  which  we 
have  known  nothing  but  for  a  few  years,  and  from 
which  we  are  so  soon  to  be  separated,  may  press 
upon  us,  and  engross  us,  and  close  round  us,  and 
shut  out  from  our  view  all  the  marvels  and  glories 
of  the  infinite  unknown.  We  are'  surrounded 
by  an  immeasurable  expanse  of  created  things, 
throughout  which  the  power  of  God  is  ever  oper- 
ating ;  but  in  our  littleness  we  find  it  hard  to  com- 
prehend that  God  may  have  manifested  himself  to 
men  in  a  mode  different  from  any  of  which  we  had 
had  experience. 

THE  revelation  of  God  has  broken  through  the 
barrier  of  clouds  that  environs  us,  and  has  opened 
to  us  the  light  of  day  beyond.  It  makes  known 
to  us  that  we  have  far  more  important  relations 
than  those  which  belong  only  to  our  present  exist- 
ence5  —  imperishable  relations  with  God,  and  his 
yet  unknown  works.  It  raises  us  into  another 
sphere  of  being.  It  blends  earth  with  heaven,  — 
connects  the  finite,  powerless  sufferer  with  the 
all-powerful  Source  of  infinite  good,  our  lives  that 
have  but  just  commenced  with  eternity,  and  our 
world  with  the  universe. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       141 

The  fact  alone  that  the  Infinite  Spirit  has  mi- 
raculously revealed  himself  to  men  answers  that 
question  in  which  we  have  so  deep  an  interest, — 
What  are  our  individual  relations  to  God  I  It  is 
in  its  being  a  miraculous  revelation,  that  the  essen- 
tial, the  inestimable  value  of  Christianity  consists. 
An  articulate  voice  has  been  uttered  from  the 
ineffable  glory  that  fills  all  space.  God,  in  thus 
speaking,  has  made  known  to  us  that  he  cares 
(we  can  use  no  other  word)  for  men  as  individual 
beings,  and  the  whole  purpose  of  his  communi- 
cation concerns  us  as  immortal  beings.  He  has 
taught  us,  that  he  does  sustain  relations  to  us,  the 
nature  of  which  we  may  inadequately  express  by 
calling  them  personal  relations.  He  has  through 
Christ  spoken  to  us,  to  borrow  the  language  of 
Scripture,  as  man  to  man.  For  our  sakes  his  ordi- 
nary operations  in  producing  the  phenomena  of 
nature  have  been  suspended,  and  his  power  has 
been  manifested  in  new  modes  of  action;  thus 
giving  us  assurance  that  the  communication  we 
have  received  is  from  the  Source  of  all  power.  It 
is  through  this  manifestation  of  God  by  Christ,  and 
through  this  alone,  that  we  are  able  to  rest  in  the 
conviction,  that  He  who  supports  all  things  in  be- 
ing may  be  contemplated  by  us  as  our  individual 
Friend  and  Father,  that  all  our  concerns  are  his 


142  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

care,  and  that  our  relations  of  entire  dependence 
on  his  infinite  goodness  are  to  continue  for  ever. 

If  we  may  trust  the  decisions  of  our  reason 
grounded  on -proofs  which  she  can  clearly  compre- 
hend, concerning  subjects  which  lie  within  her 
sphere,  such  a  supernatural  manifestation  has 
been  made.  The  fact,  I  think,  has  not  been  suffi- 
ciently attended  to,  that  our  faith  in  the  essential 
truths  of  religion,  if  derived  from  Christianity,  rests 
on  a  very  different  basis  from  what  it  could  do  if 
derived  from  any  other  source.  It  requires  for 
its  support  no  experience,  no  knowledge,  and  no 
capacities,  above  the  ordinary  faculties  and  at- 
tainments of  human  nature.  Christianity  has  so 
taught  us,  that  all  the  reasoning  necessary  to  a 
conviction  of  the  truths  which  it  has  revealed  lies, 
as  I  have  elsewhere  observed,  entirely  within  the 
compass  of  our  powers,  and  belongs  to  our  familiar 
methods  of  investigation.  The  proofs  which  estab- 
lish the  fact  that  the  Gospels  were  written  by  those 
to  whom  they  are  ascribed,  the  proofs  that  attest 
the  reality  of  all  those  other  facts  which  necessa- 
rily imply  a  divine  interposition,  are  of  the  same 
nature  as  the  proofs  on  which  we  rely  as  to  any 
other  historical  fact,  or  any  natural  phenomenon 
about  which  we  have  no  distrust,  They  are  equal- 
ly level  to  our  comprehension. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  143 

The  manifestation  through  Christ  of  the  Infinite 
Being,  and  of  his  purposes  toward  us,  still  leaves 
us,  without  doubt,  in  great  ignorance.  We  are  still 
surrounded  by  difficulties  which  we  cannot  solve, 
and  questions  press  upon  us  which  we  cannot 
answer.  But  it  has  taught  us  all  that  it  is  neces- 
sary for  us  to  know  as  the  foundation  of  the 
highest  virtue  and  the  most  glorious  hopes.  All 
correct  conceptions  of  religion,  of  the  moral  nature, 
the  relations,  and  the  duties  of  man,  —  all  which 
constitutes  the  highest  philosophy,  that  philosophy 
which  concerns  the  noblest  objects  of  thought  and 
the  most  important  interests  of  man,  —  must  rest 
on  those  realities  which  the  revelation  of  God  has 
discovered  to  us,  and  of  which  we  can  in  no  other 
way  have  assurance.  All  speculations  concerning 
religion  in  which  God's  miraculous  revelation  of 
himself  through  Christ  is  not  recognized,  may  be 
compared  to  the  speculations  of  one  who  should 
form  a  theory  concerning  the  probable  motions  of 
the  heavenly  bodies,  without  adverting  to  the  fact, 
that  the  laws  to  which  those  motions  are  conformed 
have  been  demonstrated. 

THE  Gospels  are  the  history  of  this  miraculous 
revelation  of  God  to  man.  But  they  are  not  its 
history  alone.  They  are  permanent  evidences  of 


H4        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

the  fact,  that  such  a  revelation  has  been  made. 
This  evidence  appears  in  the  very  constitution  of 
those  books,  —  in  their  actually  possessing  the 
characteristics  which  have  been  insisted  upon  by 
unbelievers  (like  Strauss)  as  a  main  ground  for 
disputing  their  credibility,  and  which  many  be- 
lievers have  most  unwisely  been  disposed  to  dis- 
guise or  deny.  It  appears  in  what  to  human 
apprehension  may,  at  first  view,  seem  their  mar- 
vellous incongruities. 

The  Gospels  are  rude  works  of  certain  Jews, 
men  belonging  to  a  despised  race,  themselves  very 
unskilled  in  writing,  having  no  literary  or  philo- 
sophical culture,  and  not  distinguished  by  any 
uncommon  natural  powers  of  mind.  They  are 
stamped  with  the  character  of  the  nation  and  the 
age  in  which  they  were  written.  But  whatever 
they  may  discover  of  human  incapacity  or  imper- 
fection appears  in  intimate  union  with  conceptions, 
which  I  do  not  say  that  the  minds  of  their  unin- 
structed  writers  could  not  have  attained,  but  which 
no  human  mind  could  have  attained  without  being 
supernaturally  enlightened  by  God,  —  conceptions, 
of  religion  and  duty,  of  all  that  is  most  sublime  in 
character,  views  of  God  and  man,  of  life  and  im- 
mortality, far  transcending  all  which  mere  human 
philosophy  has  reached.  Considered  only  as  liter- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  145 

ary  compositions,  the  Gospels  are  precisely  such 
works  as  we  might  expect  from  their  authors,  —  a 
fisherman  of  Galilee,  a  tax-gatherer  of  Galilee,  and 
two  other  Jews,  their  associates.  Yet  in  these 
works,  when  we  pass  through  their  outward  form 
to  their  contents,  and  contemplate  the  accounts 
which  their  authors  give  of  their  Master,  we  find 
the  exhibition  of  a  character  to  which  there  is 
elsewhere  no  parallel  and  no  approach  in  history 
or  fiction;  for  these  accounts  form  a  consistent 
representation  of  one  singled  out  from  the  rest  of 
men  to  sustain  peculiar  relations  to  God  and  to 
the  world,  and  thoroughly  fulfilling  these  relations. 
It  is  impossible  that  this  character  should  have 
been  an  invention  of  those  in  whose  narratives  it 
appears. 

"  God,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  has  chosen  the  foolish 
things  of  the  world  to  put  wise  men  to  shame." 
"My  discourses  and  my  preaching,"  he  tells  the 
Corinthians,  "were  not  in  persuasive  words  of 
wisdom,  but  were  accompanied  by  the  manifestation 
of  God's  spirit  and  power."  The  first  preachers 
of  Christ  were  intrusted  with  that  treasure  of  truth 
which  he  revealed.  "  But  we  have  this  treasure," 
says  the  Apostle,  "  in  earthen  vessels ;  so  that  our 
exceeding  strength  is  from  God,  and  not  of  our- 
selves." In  these  passages,  and  often  elsewhere, 

13 


146        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

he  refers  to  the  inability  of  the  first  preachers  of 
Christ  to  have  originated  his  religion,  or  to  estab- 
lish it  in  the  world  through  any  natural  powers  or 
human  wisdom  which  they  possessed.  Weak  in- 
struments indeed  they  were.  To  the  apprehensions 
of  many,  it  may  seem  incongruous  that  God  should 
employ  such  ministers ;  but  this  wonderful  con- 
trast between  their  human  insufficiency  and  what 
they  taught  and  what  they  accomplished,  estab- 
lishes the  truth  of  the  Apostle's  declaration,  that 
their  sufficiency  was  from  God.  "We  are  not  able 
of  ourselves,"  he  says,  "  to  make  account  of  any- 
thing as  our  own  work,  but  our  ability  is  from 
God." 

Conformably  to  this,  the  union  of  human  error 
and  imperfection  in  the  Gospels  with  their  great 
essential  characteristics,  renders  those  books  a 
standing  miracle  in  evidence  of  the  truth  of  Chris- 
tianity. I  use  these  words  not  loosely,  not  in  the 
way  of  declamation,  nor  in  any  metaphorical  sense, 
but  in  their  literal  meaning.  The  Gospels  bear 
with  them  a  supernatural  character ;  for  they  pre- 
sent most  striking  and  apparently  contradictory 
phenomena,  which  cannot  be  accounted  for  by  what 
we  call  natural  causes ;  and  thus  they  are  in  them- 
selves a  permanent  miracle,  an  evidence  to  men  of 
all  ages. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  147 


CHAPTER    VI. 

STRAUSS'S  PROPOSED   SUBSTITUTE   FOR    CHRISTIANITY.  —  RE- 
MARKS ON  MODERN  GERMAN  PHILOSOPHY. 

THOUGH  it  is  something  like  passing  from  clear 
air  and  bright  sunshine  into  a  chilling  and  pesti- 
lential congregation  of  vapors,  yet  we  will  return 
once  more  to  the  speculations  of  Strauss.  The 
purpose  in  view  is  sufficiently  important  to  justify 
our  doing  so.  The  "  Concluding  Dissertation  "  of 
his  book  is  full  of  instruction,  but  instruction  of  a 
wholly  different  kind  from  what  the  writer  pro- 
posed to  impart. 

In  this  Dissertation  he  gives  his  readers  to  un- 
derstand, that,  in  his  own  opinion,  he  has  accom- 
plished a  great  work.  He  begins  by  saying:  — 

"  The  results  of  the  inquiry  which  we  have  now 
brought  to  a  close,  have  apparently  annihilated 
the  greatest  and  most  valuable  part  of  that  which 
the  Christian  has  been  wont  to  believe  concerning 
his  Saviour  Jesus,  have  uprooted  all  the  animating 
motives  which  he  has  gathered  from  his  faith,  and 
withered  all  his  consolations.  The  boundless  store 


148  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

of  truth  and  life  which  for  eighteen  centuries  has 
been  the  aliment  of  humanity,  seems  irretrievably 
dissipated;  the  most  sublime  levelled  with  the 
dust,  God  divested  of  his  grace,  man  of  his  dignity, 
and  the  tie  between  heaven  and  earth  broken. 
Piety  turns  away  with  horror  from  so  fearful  an 
act  of  desecration,  and  strong  in  the  impregnable 
self-evidence  of  its  faith,  pronounces  that,  let  an 
audacious  criticism  attempt  what  it  will,  all  which 
the  scriptures  declare,  and  the  church  believes  of 
Christ,  will  still  subsist  as  eternal  truth,  nor  needs 
one  iota  of  it  to  be  renounced.  Thus  at  the  con- 
clusion of  the  criticism  of  the  history  of  Jesus, 
there  presents  itself  this  problem :  to  re-establish 
dogmatically  that  which  has  been  destroyed  criti- 
ically."* 

The  larger  part  of  the  paragraph  which  I  have 
quoted  is  plain  in  its  meaning;  —  and  no  comment 
can  be  required  on  this  cold-blooded  bravado  of 
infidelity.  The  greater  part  of  the  paragraph  is, 
as  I  have  said,  intelligible ;  but  this  is  not  true  of 
the  last  sentence :  —  "  Thus,  at  the  conclusion  of 
the  criticism  of  the  history  of  Jesus,  there  presents 
itself  this  problem:  to  re-establish  dogmatically 
that  which  has  been  destroyed  critically." 

*  Vol.  HI.  p.  396. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       149 

It  is  with  these  words  as  with  other  similar 
aggregates  of  words  which  form  the  staple  of  what 
passes  for  original  thought  in  the  works  of  many 
German  speculatists.  No  intelligible  purpose  can 
be  assigned  to  them,  except  by  considering  what 
meaning,  or  rather  what  pretence  of  meaning,  the 
connection  requires  in  order  to  keep  up  a  seeming 
continuity  of  thought.  Proceeding  by  this  rule, 
we  must  understand  Strauss  as  saying,  that  by  a 
critical  examination  the  history  of  Jesus  has  been 
shown  to  be  false,  and  that  the  problem  remains 
to  re-establish  this  history  as  true  under  the  form 
of  a  system  of  doctrines ;  or,  in  other  words,  to 
convert  the  historical  fictions  concerning  Jesus 
into  propositions  which,  as  doctrines  of  religion, 
may  be  received  as  true.  The  problem  proposed 
is,  to  discover  some  method  by  which  essential 
falsehood  may  be  changed  into  essential  truth, 
which  truth,  it  is  implied,  may  form  a  satisfactory 
substitute  for  the  falsehood. 

But  the  darkness  becomes  more  gross  as  we 
proceed ;  and  we  grope  in  vain  for  any  tangible 
meaning.  A  little  after  the  passage  just  quoted, 
the  following  occurs :  — 

"  Hitherto  our  criticism  [has]  had  for  its  object 
what  Christianity  is,  as  it  appears  in  the  history 

13* 


150  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

of  Jesus  given  in  the  evangelical  records.  Now 
this  history  having  been  called  in  question  by  our 
doubts,  it  reflects  itself  upon  itself  [throws  itself 
back  upon  itself],  and  seeks  an  asylum  in  the  soul 
of  the  believer,  where,  however,  it  exists  not  as 
simple  history,  but  as  a  history  reflected  upon 
itself,  that  is,  as  a  creed  and  dogma."  * 

From  such  passages  nothing  can  be  gathered, 
but  that  Strauss  had  a  notion  that  some  substitute 
was  to  be  provided  for  the  belief  of  a  Christian, 
which  might  replace  all  that  he  had  destroyed, 

*  "  Bisher  war  Gegenstand  der  Kritik  der  christliche  Inhalt,  wie  er 
in  den  evangelischen  Urkunden  als  Geschichte  Jesu  vorliegt :  nun 
dieser  durch  den  Zweifel  in  Anspruch  genommen  ist,  reflectirt  er 
sich  in  sich,  sucht  eine  Freistatte  im  Innern  der  Glaubigen,  wo  er  aber 
nicht  als  blosse  Geschichte,  sondern  als  in  sich  reflectirte  Geschichte, 
d.  h.  als  Bekenntniss  und  Dogma,  vorhanden  ist."  —  Leben  Jesu, 
(§  144,)  H.  665. 

I  give  my  own  rendering  above,  because  Strauss's  English  trans- 
lator appears  to  me  to  have  failed,  here  as  elsewhere,  I  do  not  say  in 
giving  the  sense  of  the  original,  for  it  would  be  hard  to  bring  it  as  a 
charge  against  him,  that  he  has  not  done  what  was  impossible,  but  in 
giving  English  words  which  fairly  represent  the  German.  He  renders 
thus  :  —  "  Hitherto  our  criticism  had  for  its  object  the  data  of  Chris- 
tianity, as  historically  presented  in  the  evangelical  records ;  now  these 
data  having  been  called  in  question  in  their  historical  form,  assume 
that  of  a  mental  product,  and  find  a  refuge  in  the  soul  of  the  believer; 
where  they  exist,  not  as  a  simple  history,  but  a  reflected  history,  that 
is,  a  confession  of  faith,  a  received  dogma." — Vol.  HI.  p.  398. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       151 

and  that  this  substitute  was  in  some  way  to  be 
connected  with  the  history  of  Christ,  "  reflected 
upon  itself." 

In  regard,  however,  to  the  work  of  re-establish- 
ing what  he  had  destroyed,  Strauss  says :  — 

"  The  critic  seems  to  require  no  such  re-estab- 
lishment, since  he  is  able  to  endure  the  annihila- 
tion resulting  from  his  own  labors.  Hence  it 
might  be  supposed  that  the  critic,  when  he  seeks 
to  rescue  the  dogma  from  the  flames  which  his 
criticism  has  kindled,  acts  falsely  in  relation  to  his 
own  point  of  view,  since,  to  satisfy  the  believer,  he 
treats  what  is  valueless  for  himself  as  if  he  esteemed 
it  to  be  a  jewel." 

"  But,"  he  adds,  "  in  proportion  as  he  is  distin- 
guished from  the  naturalistic  theologian  and  the 
free-thinker,  —  in  proportion  as  his  criticism  is 
conceived  in  the  spirit  of  the  nineteenth  century, — 
he  is  filled  with  veneration  for  every  religion,  and 
especially  for  the  substance  of  the  sublimest  of  all 
religions,  the  Christian,  which  he  perceives  to  be 
identical  with  the  deepest  philosophical  truth; 
and  hence,  after  having  in  the  course  of  his  criti- 
cism exhibited  only  the  differences  between  his 
conviction  and  the  historical  belief  of  the  Chris- 
tian, he  will  feel  urged  to  place  that  identity  in  a 


152  INTEKNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

just  light " ;  *  —  that  is,  as  appears  from  what  fol- 
lows, the  identity  of  the  substance  of  Christianity 
with  the  atheistic  philosophy  of  Hegel. 

In  what  follows  the  introductory  matter  from 
which  I  have  quoted,  Strauss  goes  over  various 
schemes  of  religion,  apparently  with  the  purpose 
of  finding  some  substitute  for  the  common  belief 
of  Christians  in  the  truth  of  the  history  of  Christ. 
He  first  treats  at  length  of  what  he  calls  "  the 
Christology  of  the  Orthodox  System."  But  there 
was  no  reason  for  introducing  this  scheme,  nor  any 
propriety  in  doing  so,  since,  whatever  may  be  its 
character  in  other  respects,  it  supposes  for  its 
foundation  the  belief  of  the  history  of  Christ  as 
given  in  the  Gospels,  and  cannot,  therefore, -be 
proffered  as  a  substitute  for  belief.  He  then  passes 
to  what  is  properly  to  his  purpose,  the  exposition 
of  various  schemes  of  infidelity  which  havje  pre- 
vailed among  his  countrymen,  —  that  of  the  earlier 
Rationalists,  and  then  those  of  Schleiermacher, 
Kant,  De  Wette,  and  others,  all  of  which  he  rejects 
as  unsatisfactory,  and  finally  comes  down  to  the 
latest  product  of  German  philosophy,  the  He- 
gelian theory,  as  modified  by  himself.  This  may 
be  explained  as  follows*. 

*  Vol.  HI.  p.  397. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  153 

Schelling  laid  down  the  proposition,  that  "  the 
incarnation  of  God  is  an  incarnation  from  eter- 
nity." "  By  the  incarnate  Son  of  God,"  says 
Strauss,  "  he  understood  the  finite  itself  as  it 
attains  consciousness  in  man,  and,  in  its  distinc- 
tion from  the  infinite,  with  which  it  is  yet  one, 
appears  as  a  suffering  God,  subjected  to  the  rela- 
tions of  time."* 

"  In  the  latest  philosophy,"  says  Strauss,  "  this 
idea  is  thus  further  developed.  If  God  be  pro- 
nounced tp  be  spirit,  then,  since  man  also  is  spirit, 
it  follows  at  once  that  they  are  not  in  themselves 
[essentially]  different.  Furthermore,  since  it  is 
essential  to  spirit  in  its  distinction  from  itself  to 
remain  identical  with  itself,  to  possess  itself  in  an- 
other than  itself,  it  is  implied  in  our  recognition  of 
God  as  spirit,  that  he  does  not  remain  fixed  as  a 
barren  infinite  without  and  above  finite  things, 
but  enters  into  them,  producing  the  finite,  nature 
and  the  human  spirit,  only  as  a  renunciation  of 

*  Vol.  HE.  pp.  432,  433.  I  give  my  own  rendering.  The  original 
of  the  last  sentence  is  as  follows  :  "  Verstand  der  letztere  [Schelling] 
unter  dem  menschgewordenen  Sohn  Gottes  das  Endliche  selbst,  wie 
es  im  Menschen  zum  Bewusstsein  kommt,  und  in  seinem  Unterschiede 
von  dem  Unendlichen,  mit  dem  es  doch  Eins  ist,  als  ein  leidender, 
und  den  Verhaltnissen  der  Zeit  unterworfener  Gott  erscheint."  — 
Leben  Jesu,  (§  150,)  H  704. 


154       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

himself,  from  which,  on  the  other  hand,  he  is  ever 
returning  into  unity  with  himself.  Simply  as  finite 
spirit  confined  to  its  finiteness,  man  has  not  truth 
[has  no  true,' real  existence];  and  as  little  has  God 
reality  simply  as  infinite  spirit,  secluding  itself  in 
its  infinity.  The  infinite  is  real  spirit  only  when 
it  develops  itself  into  finite  spirits ;  as  the  finite 
spirit  is  true  only  when  it  merges  itself  in  the  in- 
finite. Thus  the  true  and  real  being  of  spirit  is 
neither  God  by  himself,  nor  man  by  himself,  but 
the  God-man  [the  union  of  God  and  man] ;  neither 
its  infinity  alone,  nor  its  finiteness  alone,  but  the 
motion  of  influx  and  reflux  between  both,  which 
on  the  divine  side  is  revelation ;  on  the  human, 
religion."  * 

The  next  paragraph  begins  with  supposing  the 
truth  of  the  proposition,  that "  God  and  man  are 
in  themselves  one''  (" Sind  Gott  und  Mensch  an 
sich  Ems,"  u.  s.  w.) 

As  some  key  to  what  it  was  the  purpose  of  the 
writer  to  have  regarded  as  the  meaning  of  the 

*  Here  again  the  rendering  is  my  own.  Strauss's  English  transla- 
tor, Vol.  HI.  p.  433,  seems  either  not  to  have  fully  comprehended  the 
philosophy  and  reasoning  of  his  author,  or  not  to  have  been  disposed 
to  present  it  unveiled  to  English  readers.  The  original  passage 
stands  in  Strauss,  §  150,  Vol.  H.  pp.  704,  705. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  155 

words  I  have  quoted,  it  is  to  be  understood  that, 
according  to  the  philosophy  of  Hegel,  the  sub- 
stratum of  all  things  is  infinite,  unconscious  spirit, 
which  assumes  consciousness  of  its  own  existence 
in  finite,  human  spirits,  into  which  it  develops 
itself.  On  these  doctrines  of  Schelling  and  Hegel 
is  founded  Strauss's  proposed  substitute  for  Chris- 
tianity. It  is  an  allegory,  in  which  he  represents 
the  true  doctrines  of  philosophy,  —  of  the  highest 
German  philosophy,  —  as  shadowed  forth  symbol- 
ically in  what  he  regards  as  the  orthodox  system  of 
the  Church  concerning  the  character  and  office  of 
Christ.  He  thus  exhibits  it. 

"  The  key  of  the  whole  Christology  is  this,  that 
the  subject  of  those  predicates  which  the  Church 
ascribes  to  Christ  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  an  indi- 
vidual, but  as  an  Idea  ;  as  a  real  Idea,  however,  — 
not  as,  according  to  Kant,  an  imaginary  one. 
Considered  as  existing  in  an  individual,  in  a  God- 
man,  the  attributes  and  offices  which  the  doctrine 
of  the  Church  ascribes  to  Christ  are  inconsistent 
with  each  other ;  in  the  Idea  of  the  species,  they 
agree  together.  Humanity  is  the  union  of  the 
two  natures;  it  is  God  become  man;  the  infinite 
spirit  renouncing  its  infinity  and  becoming  finite, 
and  the  finite  spirit  becoming  conscious  of  its  in- 


156       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

finity.  It  is  the  child  of  the  visible  mother  and 
the  invisible  father ;  of  spirit  and  of  nature.  It  is 
the  worker  of  miracles ;  inasmuch  as,  in  the  prog- 
ress of  man's  history,  the  spirit  is  continually 
obtaining  more  full  mastery  over  nature,  both  in 
man  and  around  him;  nature  becoming  subjected 
to  its  activity  as  a  powerless  material.  Humanity 
is  the  sinless ;  inasmuch  as  the  process  of  its  de- 
velopment is  blameless ;  pollution  cleaves  only  to 
the  individual,  but  in  the  species,  and  in  its  his- 
tory, is  thrown  off.  It  is  Humanity  that  dies,  and 
rises  from  the  dead,  and  ascends  to  heaven ;  inas- 
much as,  through  the  negation  of  its  naturality 
[what  in  its  composition  belongs  to  nature],  it 
is  continually  attaining  a  higher  spiritual  life, 
and  by  throwing  off  its  finiteness,  as  a  personal, 
national  spirit,  a  spirit  of  this  world,  its  unity 
with  the  infinite  spirit  of  heaven  is  brought  out. 
Through  faith  in  this  Christ,  particularly  in  his 
death  and x  resurrection,  is  man  justified  before 
God ;  that  is,  through  the  quickening  of  the  Idea 
of  Humanity  within  him  the  individual  becomes  a 
partaker  of  the  divinely  human  life  of  the  spe- 
cies ;  —  conformably  to  the  fact,  that  the  negation 
of  naturality  and  sensuality  (SinnlichJceit) — which 
is  but  the  negation  of  a  negation,  seeing  that  they 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  157 

are  but  the  negation  of  the  spiritual — is  the  only 
way  for  men  to  attain  the  true  spiritual  life. 

"This  alone  is  the  absolute  purport  of  the 
Christology.  That  this  appears  connected  with 
the  person  and  history  of  an  individual,  belongs 
merely  to  its  historical  form."  * 

I  HAVE  said  that  the  Concluding  Dissertation  of 
Strauss  is  full  of  instruction.  It  is  rare  to  meet 
with  an  equal  number  of  pages  from  which  so 
much  may  be  learned,  or  which  afford  information 
of  so  thorough  a  character.  Every  one  whose 
attention  has  been  drawn  to  the  strange  and  mul- 
tifarious doctrines  that  have  obtained  currency  in 
our  day,  has  heard  of  the  speculations  of  German 
philosophers  (so  called)  in  theology  and  meta- 
physics, and  knows  something  of  their  pretensions 
and  of  the  boasts  of  their  admirers.  The  Conclud- 
ing Dissertation  of  Strauss  affords  abundant  mate- 
rials for  forming  a  judgment  of  the  character  and 
results  of  those  speculations,  which  all  our  further 
knowledge  of  them  may  serve  to  confirm.  In  this 
case,  if  in  any,  the  old  proverb  holds  true,  that  it 

*  Leben  Jesu,  (§  151,)  II.  709-711 ;  English  Translation,  HI.  437, 
438.    I  have  formerly  had  occasion  to  quote  and  remark  on  this  pas- 
sage.    See  "  Tracts  concerning  Christianity,"  p.  360,  seqq. 
14 


158  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

is  not  necessary  to  drain  the  ocean  to  learn  that  its 
waters  are  salt.  The  materials  for  forming  a  judg- 
ment of  this  philosophy  are  not  furnished  by  an 
opposer  of  it,  by  an  adherent  of  common  sense, 
nor  by  a  neophyte  giving  his  crude,  mistaken  im- 
aginations of  what  he  has  imperfectly  learned,  but 
by  one  initiated  in  its  mysteries,  who  is  liable  to 
no  suspicion  of  intending  to  expose  them  to  re- 
proach or  derision. 

How  then  must  such  passages  as  I  have  quoted 
be  regarded,  I  do  not  say  by  a  religious  man,  or  by 
an  enlightened  philosopher,  but  by  a  man  of  com- 
mon clearness  of  intellect,  accustomed  to  expect 
some  meaning  in  language,  and  some  coherence  of 
ideas  ?  How  would  such  writers  as  Strauss,  and 
the  other  speculatists  among  his  countrymen  to 
whom  he  is  allied,  have  been  looked  upon  by  the 
English  thinkers  of  former  times  (from  whom  it 
must  be  confessed  that  in  the  general  tone  of  our 
literature  we  have  somewhat  degenerated),  —  by 
such  men  as  Locke,  and  those  who  followed  him, 
by  Berkeley  and  Butler  ]  What  scope  might  these 
theorists,  "  all-seeing  in  their  mists,"  have  afforded 
for  the  penetrating  and  destructive  satire  of  Pope ! 
With  what  zest  would  Swift  have  given  them  a 
place  among  his  philosophers  of  Laputa!  How 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  159 

would  Burke  (who  taught  that  "  where  there  is  no 
sound  reason,  there  is  no  real  virtue  ")  have  poured 
out  upon  them  the  tempest  of  his  scorn  with  its 
vivid  lightnings  !  —  if  we  may  suppose  the  atten- 
tion of  men  like  Pope  and  Swift  and  Burke  to 
have  been  fixed  on  such  a  class  of  writers.  They 
dwell  in  a  chaos  of  ideas  which  has  no  analogy 
to  the  world  in  which  men  think  and  reason 
and  endue  their  purposes  with  intelligible  words. 
There  is  no  community  between  the  two  regions. 
The  inhabitants  of  one  have  no  sentiments  or  lan- 
guage in  common  with  those  of  the  other.  The 
opposition  between  them  is  like  that  which  the 
ancient  Persians  imagined  between  the  empire  of 
light  and  the  empire  of  darkness. 

Such  being  the  character  of  these  speculations, 
it  is  natural  that  they  should  be  put  forward  with 
great  pretension,  and  that  those  who  receive  them 
should  congratulate  each  other  on  their  intellectual 
superiority.  For  there  is  but  an  alternative.  The 
case  admits  of  no  qualified  judgment.  These  spec- 
ulations are  either,  as  their  admirers  contend, 
revelations  of  transcendent  wisdom,  or  they  are 
something  of  a  wholly  different  character. 

THE  school  of  writers  to  which  such  speculatists 


160  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

as  Strauss  belong  is  not,  in  its  modern  devel- 
opment among  his  countrymen,  to  be  character- 
ized by  its  peculiar  doctrines;  for,  so  far  as  its 
doctrines  haVe  assumed  a  determinate  shape,  there 
has  been  little  accordance  among  those  of  different 
parties  into  which  it  has  been  divided,  except  in 
their  common  irreligious  and  debasing  tendency. 
But  it  is  characterized  by  a  use  of  language,  which, 
considered  either  in  itself,  or  in  its  connection  with 
what  is  elsewhere  propounded,  or  in  its  relations 
to  unquestionable  truths  and  to  the  common  con- 
ceptions of  men,  presents  no  intelligible  ideas.  It 
is  a  school  which  existed  long  before  its  recent 
appearance  in  Germany.  It  is  of  great  antiquity, 
it  has  spread  very  widely,  and  occupied  vast  re- 
gions in  the  domain  of  opinion,  always  presenting 
the  same  essential  characteristics.  It  may  be  called 
"  the  School  of  the  Mystics,"  in  the  widest  sense  of 
that  term,  or  "  the  School  of  the  Incomprehensi- 
ble"; or  perhaps  no  other  name  can  be  found  for 
it  more  appropriate  than  one  which  has  already 
become  attached  to  the  modern  branch  of  it,  and 
which  may  be  extended  to  the  whole,  "  the  Tran- 
scendental School."  Quintilian  has  preserved  the 
story  of  a  teacher  of  composition  who  inculcated 
on  his  pupils  the  excellence  of  obscurity.  He  con 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  161 

densed  his  instructions  to  them  into  one  Greek 
word,  SKOTUTOV,  Darken.  Quintilian,  being  a  Latin, 
and  the  Latins  in  general,  not  affecting  that  style, 
evidently  regarded  the  direction  as  something  ridic- 
ulous. He  does  not  advert  to  the  fact,  that  it  had 
been  a  fundamental  rule  of  writing  with  many  of 
the  Greek  philosophers,  which  probably  originated 
in  an  incapacity  not  to  darken.  I  have  elsewhere 
had  occasion  to  show  that  obscurity  was  regarded 
from  an  early  period  as  a  distinguishing  excellence 
of  style,  and  the  appropriate  badge  of  the  profound- 
est  philosophy.* 

The  spirit  of  this  school,  the  disposition  to  ob- 
scure and  distort  what  is  false,  or  trivial,  or  un- 
meaning, so  that  it  may  appear  some  revelation  of 
wisdom  before  unknown,  to  make  doctrines  out  of 
unformed  imaginations,  and  to  throw  all  knowledge 
into  confusion  by  the  abuse  of  language,  appears 
in  much  that  remains  or  is  known  of  the  ancient 
philosophers  before  the  time  of  Cicero.  After  his 
time  this  widely-spread  school  embraced  the  whole 
body  of  the  later  Platonists,  and  the  allied  sects  of 
the  Gnostics  and  the  Jewish  Cabbalists.  It  has 
not  been  confined  to  Europe,  but  has  enveloped  in 

*    See  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  TTT.  pp. 
86-91. 

14* 


162  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF   THE 

its  darkness  the  philosophy  and  theology  of  India 
and  Persia.  Its  spirit  has  possessed  that  long 
series  of  Christian  writers  on  dogmatic  theology 
(so  called)  who  have  been  zealous  in  maintaining 
as  essential  to  our  religion  doctrines  before  which 
they  summon  reason  to  humble  herself  in  sacred 
horror.  It  was  the  spirit  of  the  schoolmen  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  —  to  whom  and  to  their  successors 
Locke,  in  treating  of  the  nature  of  language  and 
the  characteristics  of  this  style  of  writing,  had  par- 
ticular reference.  It  showed  itself  equally  in  their 
contemporaries,  the  alchemists  and  the  astrologers, 
whose  pretensions  were  as  monstrous,  and  whose 
language  was  as  barbarous,  as  any  of  the  present 
day.  Before  its  recent  great  outbreak  in  Germany, 
it  had  manifested  itself  often  in  modern  times  by 
smaller  exhibitions  which  had  prepared  for  its 
fuller  display.  It  had  characterized  the  specula- 
tions of  Spinoza  and  the  pantheists ;  for  no  doc- 
trine can  involve  absurdities  more  monstrous  than 
pantheism,  or  consequently  bring  together  more  un- 
intelligible combinations  of  words.  It  is  through 
fellowship  in  the  same  great  school,  that  the  doc- 
trine of  Spinoza  has  had  so  marked  an  influence 
on  German  literature,  and  that  such  admiration 
has  been  expressed  for  him  by  modern  transcen- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       163 

dental  philosophers,  —  for  his  penetration,  his 
cogent  reasoning,  and  even,  as  if  in  mockery  of 
common  sense,  for  his  highly  devotional  spirit.* 

To  a  philosopher  of  this  school  it  may  appear  a 
strange  doctrine,  that  so  humble  a  matter  as  the 
right  use  of  words  can  have  anything  to  do  with 
his  speculations.  In  his  view,  these  speculations 
penetrate  the  uttermost  regions  of  thought;  and 
the  language  in  which  they  are  put  forth  is  not  to 


*  I  speak  only  of  the  larger  and  more  distinguished  bodies  of  which 
this  school  has  been  composed ;  but  perhaps,  even  in  such  an  enumer- 
ation, Jacob  Boehme  and  his  followers  ought  not  to  be  passed  over 
without  notice  ;  for  he  was  one  of  the  most  famous  of  mystics,  and  was 
called  in  his  day  "the  Teutonic  philosopher,"  —  a  name  the  appro- 
priateness of  which  has  been  confirmed  by  the  recent  phenomena 
of  German  philosophy,  and  by  his  having  been  recognized  by  some  of 
its  most  famous  teachers  as  one  of  its  forerunners  and  progenitors. 
His  works  were  translated  into  English  by  William  Law  (better 
known  as  the  author  of  "  A  Serious  Call  to  a  Devout  and  Holy  Life  "). 
But  those  to  whom  the  English  language  is  their  mother  tongue  are 
in  general  but  poor  recipients  of  mysticism,  and  in  this  department  of 
thought  English  literature  has  produced  of  late  but  one  conspicuous 
name ;  I  say  but  one  conspicuous  name,  for  the  great  work  of  Cole- 
ridge, which  was  to  reconcile  and  supersede  all  other  philosophy,  had 
never,  I  conceive,  what  logicians  call  a  potential  being.  The  idea  of 
it,  in  the  semi-Platonic  sense  of  the  word  idea,  never  existed  in  his 
own  mind.  But  Coleridge  was  a  man  whose  natural  powers,  had  he 
been  true  to  himself,  might  have  enabled  him  to  become  something 
very  different  from  a  mystagogue  of  German  metaphysics. 


164  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

be  understood  through  an  acquaintance  with  the 
ordinary  signification  of  terms.  Its  meaning  is  to 
be  perceived  by  a  peculiar  sense,  by  a  power  of 
inward  vision  which  derives  no  aid  from  extraneous 
knowledge.  He  promulgates  great  truths,  which 
are  not  to  be  understood,  but  to  be  felt.  His  con- 
ceptions are  debased  by  being  brought  down  to 
what  is  intelligible.  He  announces  propositions, 
which  to  common  men  seem  mere  absurdities,  as 
when,  to  take  one  among  ten  thousand,  Hegel 
announces  that  "  mere  being  and  mere  nothing  are 
the  same."*  It  is  amid  the  darkness  of  language 
which  has  no  vulgar  meaning,  that  the  higher 
subjects  of  thought  are  to  be  shown  surrounded 
by  a  phosphoric  glimmer.  —  But  the  unintelligible 
words  that  are  used  are  words  of  magic  by  which 

*  "  Das  reine  Seyn  und  das  reine  Nichts  1st  dasselbe." 

"  Peut-etre,"  says  Madame  de  Stael  in  her  eulogy  of  Kant, — "  Peut- 
etre  toutefois  n'auroit-il  creuse  si  profondement  dans  la  science  de 
1'entendement  humain,  s'il  avoit  mis  plus  d'importance  aux  expressions 
dont  il  se  servoit  pour  1'expliquer." 

This  is  the  same  sort  of  language  as  if  one  were  to  say  of  a  math- 
ematician, that  perhaps  his  investigations  would  not  have  been  so  pro- 
found, if  he  had  attended  more  to  the  significance  of  the  symbols 
used  by  him. 

She  adds :  "  Dans  ses  trait6s  de  metaphysique,  il  prend  des  mots 
comme  des  chiffres,  et  leur  donne  la  valeur  qu'il  veut  sans  s'embar- 
rasser  de  celle  qu'ils  tiennent  de  1'usage." 


GENUINENESS  OF   THE   GOSPELS.  165 

the  sun  is  darkened  at  mid-day ;  and  through  the 
obscurity  which  envelops  all  things,  shapes  pre- 
sent themselves  like  those  which  ^fEneas  saw 

"  Vestibulum  ante  ipsum,  primisque  in  faucibus  Orel," 

before  the  vestibule,  and  where  •  opened  the  jaws  of 
Hell,  —  horrible  phantoms  which  he  was  about 
to  assail  with  human  arms,  if  his  guide  had  not 
admonished  him  that  they  were  but  shadows. 

"  Et,  ni  docta  comes  tenues  sine  corpore  vitas 
Admoneat  volitare  cava  sub  imagine  formse, 
Irruat,  et  frustra  ferro  diverberet  umbras." 

If  all  this  were  mere  folly,  it  would  be  compar- 
atively a  matter  of  little  concern.  But  we  have 
seen  that  it  is  not  mere  folly.  It  is  rare  that 
folly  is  not  mischievous.  Its  effects  are  very  often 
disastrous.  Speculative  folly  and  practical  folly 
commonly  go  together.  The  preachers  of  false 
doctrines,  the  opposers  of  truth,  the  utterers  of 
what  wise  men  regard  as  nonsense,  have  wrought, 
directly  or  indirectly,  most  of  the  moral  evil  that 
exists  in  the  civilized  world.  Men  —  with  the  ex- 
ception of  those  whose  conduct  is  determined  by  cir- 
cumstances and  by  impulses  obeyed  without  reflec- 
tion, and  of  those  whose  reason  is  violently  borne 
down  by  their  passions  —  pretend  to  be  governed 


166  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

• 

by  their  opinions,  on  the  ground  that  their  opinions 
are  conformed  to  the  truth.  There  is  no  greater 
evil-doer  than  he  who,  in  the  restlessness  and 
recklessness  of  his  vanity,  furnishes  them  with 
pretences  for  any  belief  or  disbelief  that  may  either 
loosen  their  sense  of  the  obligations  of  religion 
and  morality,  or  may  pervert  and  misguide  it. 
False  speculations,  and  the  practical  theories  which 
have  resulted  from  them,  —  I  refer  to  speculations 
old  as  well  as  new,  —  are  among  the  chief  sources 
of  those  awful  calamities  with  which  Europe  is 
now  afflicted.  The  wild  doctrines  of  Communism 
and  Socialism,  the  dreams  and  the  absurdities  of 
such  men  as  St.  Simon,  Robert  Owen,  and  Fourier, 
have  caused  the  streets  of  Paris  to  run  with  blood. 
It  is  the  conflict,  not  between  right  and  wrong, 
not  between  truth  and  falsehood,  but  between  new 
errors  and  old  prejudices,  the  one  tending  to  evil 
not  less  than  the  other,  which  is  now  unsettling 
the  foundations  of  Christian  and  civilized  society 
throughout  a  great  portion  of  Europe.  All  the 
party  watchwords  by  which  the  ferocious  passions 
and  the  viler  propensities  of  men  are  excited,  or  by 
which  their  ignorance  and  folly  are  imposed  upon, 
acquire  their  power  for  evil  from  the  abuse  of  lan- 
guage. They  are  general  terms,  such  as  liberty, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  167 

fraternity,  equality,  capable  of  being  understood 
in  very  different  senses  and  applications,  and 
therefore  of  being  easily  perverted,  which  are  cast 
abroad  among  the  multitude,  to  be  interpreted  ac- 
cording to  the  passions,  the  folly,  the  caprice,  or 
the  madness  of  those  who  may  adopt  them  as 
their  cry. 

It  is  by  its  debasing  and  destroying  the  moral 
and  religious  sentiments  of  men,  that  we  discern 
the  worst  effect  of  that  school  of  pretended  phi- 
losophy which  deals  with  imaginations  instead 
of  truths,  with  unformed  thought,  assumptions 
equally  arbitrary  and  absurd,  and  a  vague,  barbar- 
ous, false  vocabulary.  It  has  wrought  this  effect, 
not  only  by  the  doctrines  it  has  directly  taught,  but 
also  by  spreading  confusion  through  men's  ideas 
and  language,  and  thus  confounding  their  reason, 
so  that  the  supremacy  of  truth  in  their  minds  and 
hearts  cannot  be  established.  It  has  infected  the 
whole  body  of  literature  connected  with  it,  deprav- 
ing the  taste  of  its  writers  and  its  admirers ;  —  for 
taste  is  not  a  distinct  faculty  of  the  mind ;  it  is  in 
each  individual  an  expression  of  his  whole  charac- 
ter, of  his  likings  and  dislikings,  of  the  quickness 
or  obtuseness  of  his  intellectual  perceptions,  and  of 
the  purity  or  depravation  of  his  moral  sentiments. 


168  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

Thus  it  appears  in  the  corrupt  forms  which  so 
much  of  the  literature  of  Continental  Europe  has 
assumed,  with  its  bold  lessons  of  vice  and  irreligion. 
Its  effects  in  deadening  the  love  of  truth  and  dis- 
ordering the  powers  of  reasoning  have  been  made 
apparent  in  the  departments  of  philology,  antiqui- 
ties, and  history.  Nay,  its  influence  has  been  felt 
where  it  might  least  be  expected,  for  it  has  carried 
its  reckless  assertions  and  its  unintelligible  jargon 
even  into  the  physical  sciences. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  169 


NIVERSITY 


CHAPTER    VII. 

CONCLUDING  EEMAEKS. 

WE  have  thus  taken  a  view  of  the  work  of 
Strauss,  and  of  that  philosophy,  falsely  so  called, 
with  which  this  and  many  similar  works  have  been 
connected.  The  importance  of  such  works,  and  of 
the  speculations  on  which  they  are  grounded,  — 
their  efficiency  in  the  production  of  evil,  —  is  liable 
to  be  greatly  underrated.  Putting  aside  the  brute 
influence  of  the  passions,  the  other  causes  which 
affect  the  condition  of  society  and  the  character  of 
individuals  are  often  but  little  attended  to;  and 
their  character  and  workings  may  not  be  readily 
discerned  and  appreciated.  The  moral  atmosphere 
may  be  filled  with  pestilential  miasmata,  the  pres- 
ence of  which  may  not  be  obvious  to  our  grosser 
senses.  Religion,  morals,  the  love  of  truth,  the 
principles  on  which  rests  the  well-being  of  man, 
may  be  gradually  undermined  ;  the  evil  may  be 

15 


170  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

working  on,  from  day  to  day,  in  secret,  almost  un- 
marked, or  other  props  wholly  ineffectual  may  be 
resorted  to  for  temporary  security ;  but  the  ruin 
must  follow. 

So  far  as  men  are  not  driven  blindly  onward  by 
their  unreasoning  passions,  they  are  governed  by 
their  opinions.  The  opinions  of  an  individual  are 
but  another  name  for  the  whole  body  of  principles 
from  which  he  professes  to  act,  so  far  as  he  pro- 
fesses to  act  reasonably.  It  is,  therefore,  a  matter 
of  essential  concern  to  us,  that  our  opinions  should 
be  correct.  But  the  opinions  of  a  great  majority 
of  men  are  determined,  the  opinions  of  all  men  are 
influenced  more  or  less  powerfully,  by  a  regard  to 
the  representations  and  reasonings,  true  or  false, 
or  by  a  mere  regard  to  the  determinations,  of  those 
who  are,  or  those  who  are  esteemed  to  be,  distin- 
guished by  their  intellectual  superiority.  It  is, 
then,  of  the  utmost  importance  to  us,  that  our 
guides  should  be  trustworthy.  Our  hope  for  the 
regeneration  and  improvement  of  our  race  must  be 
in  the  prevalence  of  truth,  —  of  Christian  truth, 
of  truth  concerning  our  nature,  intellectual  and 
moral,  our  condition  in  this  world,  our  means  of 
self-improvement,  our  relations  to  our  fellow-men, 
and  our  connection  with  all  those  realities  beyond 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  171 

the  sphere  of  the  senses,  from  which  Christianity 
has  withdrawn  the  veil.  "I  was  born  for  this 
end,"  said  he  whom  God  sent  to  the  world  to  save 
the  world,  —  "I  was  horn  for  this  end,  and  for 
this  end  have  I  come  to  the  world,  to  bear  testi- 
mony to  the  Truth.  Every  one  who  loves  the 
Truth  obeys  my  voice." 

Those  great  truths  which  essentially  concern  all 
that  men  do  and  feel  are  the  principles  on  which 
our  characters  should  be  formed.  They  are  the 
most  important  objects  of  our  intellect,  because 
they  relate  to  the  most  important  objects  of  our 
existence.  They  do  not  spontaneously  develop 
themselves.  In  order  to  establish  those  truths 
among  men  and  give  them  their  due  supremacy, 
intellectual  discipline  is  necessary,  a  wide  knowl- 
edge of  facts,  the  acquisition  of  clear  ideas,  the 
habit  of  using  language  correctly,  and  the  power 
and  the  art  of  reasoning.  When  a  knowledge  of 
them  is  thus  attained,  if  it  be  distinctly  put  before 
men,  it  may  be  widely  communicated ;  for  these 
truths  have  a  natural  affinity  with  all  that  is 
excellent  in  our  nature.  The  deductions  of  the 
most  profound  and  enlightened  philosophy  corre- 
spond with  and  confirm  the  dictates  of  plain  good 
sense.  It  is  with  the  highest  exertions  of  intel- 


172       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

lect  as  with  the  noblest  productions  of  what  is 
popularly  called  genius.  The  results  are  compre- 
hended and  felt  by  millions  with  whom  they  could 
not  have  originated ;  and  this  community  of  com- 
prehension and  feeling  may  bring  us  into  close 
association  with  the  master  minds  of  the  world. 
Inferior  as  may  be  our  creative  or  reasoning 
powers,  we  become  conscious  of  an  essential  equal- 
ity with  them  when  we  can  enter  into  their  con- 
ceptions, sympathize  in  their  sentiments,  and  follow 
them  in  their  reasoning. 

IN  this  country  we  have  peculiar  advantages  for 
the  attainment  and  promulgation  of  truth.  There 
doubtless  exist  here  mistakes  and  prejudices  in 
abundance.  But  we  have  not  to  encounter  those 
prejudices  existing  elsewhere,  which  have  become 
rigid  and  unyielding  through  age,  and  which  de- 
rive vitality  and  vigor  from  being  incorporated 
with  the  love  of  power,  rank,  and  wealth,  in  priv- 
ileged classes,  whose  distinctions  depend  on  them 
for  support.  We  have  our  share  of  that  clear- 
sightedness and  good  sense  by  which  those  who 
inherit  the  English  tongue  and  English  literature 
are  distinguished  as  a  general  characteristic,  and 
which  may  prevent  us  from  being  easily,  or,  at 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  173 

least,  from  being  long,  imposed  upon  by  false  pre- 
tences. But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  are  discour- 
aging circumstances.  There  is  a  want  among  us 
of  a  proper  appreciation  of  the  importance  of  intel- 
lectual discipline,  of  that  discipline  through  which 
men  are  formed  to  reason  rightly  on  subjects  that 
concern  their  highest  interests,  but  which  are  not 
immediately  connected  with  their  ordinary  busi- 
ness. We  cultivate  successfully  the  physical  and 
exact  sciences,  and  especially  those  through  which 
the  arts  of  life  are  promoted.  We  are  distinguished 
by  our  skill  in  their  application,  by  the  number 
and  ingenuity  of  our  mechanical  inventions.  But 
these  are  not  the  studies  on  which  the  essential 
well-being  of  man  depends.  Their  cultivation 
alone  can  do  nothing  to  save  a  nation  from  moral 
degeneracy  and  ruin.  Nowhere  in  Europe  have 
they  flourished  more  than  in  that  country  which, 
having  long  suffered  from  accumulating  causes  of 
misery,  irreligion,  and  vice,  has,  since  the  latter 
part  of  the  last  century,  been  restlessly  and  vio- 
lently changing  its  forms  of  government,  and 
remodelling  the  constitution  of  society,  without 
finding  a  remedy  for  its  evils.  There  are  other 
departments  of  thought  and  learning  of  far  higher 
importance,  because  truth  and  error,  knowledge 

15* 


174        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

and  ignorance,  concerning  the  subjects  which  they 
embrace,  are  of  far  more  interest  to  human  happi- 
ness. 

I  will  refer,  for  example,  to  two  sciences,  which 
relate  less  immediately  to  the  formation  of  individ- 
ual character,  but  rather  concern  the  present  well- 
being  of  masses  of  men,  —  the  science  of  political 
government,  and  the  science  of  political  economy. 
There  is,  as  I  believe,  no  literary  institution  in 
our  country  in  which  they  are  so  taught  as  to  fur- 
nish those  resorting  to  it  for  instruction  with  such 
knowledge,  such  principles,  and  such  habits  of 
reasoning,  as  to  prepare  them  for  those  duties  to 
which  they  may  be  called  as  public  men.  Nor 
are  these  institutions  centres  from  which  may 
spread  through  the  great  body  of  our  people  those 
correct  notions  concerning  the  principles  of  public 
policy  which  it  is  important  should  exist,  when, 
as  with  us,  the  course  of  public  policy  is  ultimately 
determined  by  the  great  body  of  the  people.  Our 
colleges  and  universities  do  not  afford  the  encour- 
agement necessary  to  form  in  connection  with  them 
a  body  of  men  fitted  to  be  the  teachers  and  guides 
of  the  community  in  these  departments  of  learning. 
They  have  not  sufficient  means,  if  they  have  any, 
for  the  support  of  professorships,  which  such  men 
might  be  ambitious  of  holding. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  175 

Of  the  evils  of  ignorance  in  these  departments 
of  knowledge,  the  Old  World  is  presenting  appall- 
ing examples.  We  see  in  France  that  principles 
of  government,  the  truth  of  which  has  been  forced 
on  the  conviction  of  every  intelligent  American 
through  his  experience  of  the  workings  of  our  re- 
publican institutions,  are  unknown  or  disregarded. 
As  the  next  of  those  disastrous  experiments  on 
the  happiness  of  society  of  which  that  nation  has 
tried  so  many,  it  appears  that  all  the  powers  of 
government  are,  for  as  long  a  time  as  such  a  con- 
stitution may  last,  to  be  concentred  in  one  large 
Convention,  which  will  be  as  unrestrained  and  as 
uncontrollable  in  its  exercise  of  them  as  the  fierce 
democracy  of  Athens,  or  as  that  Convention  of  the 
Reign  of  Terror,  of  which  the  dreadful  memory 
might  seem  to  have  died  away  in  the  country  over 
which  it  tyrannized,  if  it  were  not  for  the  exculpa- 
tory eulogies  which  are  uttered  on  the  disinterest- 
edness, patriotism,  and  energy  of  some  of  its  most 
atrocious  members.  In  the  very  formation  of  any 
central  power  which  is  alone  to  exercise  through- 
out the  country  all  the  functions  of  the  govern- 
ment, in  the  cry  of  "  The  Republic,  one  and 
indivisible"  we  Americans  perceive  another  fun- 
damental mistake.  Republican  institutions,  re- 


176  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

publican  even  only  in  form  and  name,  cannot 
exist  for  the  happiness  of  a  large  community,  they 
cannot  exist  at  all  for  any  long  time,  without  a 
distribution  of  powers  to  bodies  subordinate  to 
the  general  government,  each  independent  in  its 
own  sphere,  each  taking  charge  of  its  own  partic- 
ular concerns,  and  each  ready  to  check  all  en- 
croachments of  the  central  power.  With  what  a 
burst  of  indignation  and  repulsion  would  a  prefect 
be  received  who  should  be  sent  from  a  convention 
at  Washington  to  govern  my  native  State  of  Mas- 
sachusetts! or  how  in  any  town  or  city  of  this 
State  would  an  officer  be  welcomed  who  should  be 
despatched  from  a  body  of  delegates  in  Boston  to 
take  on  himself  the  management  of  its  affairs'? 
The  present  condition  of  France  affords  no  hope 
of  the  speedy  restoration  of  internal  quiet  and  the 
formation  of  a  well-ordered  community.  So  long 
as  the  supreme,  undivided  power  resides  nominally 
in  a  national  assembly  convened  in  Paris,  it  seems 
clear  that  the  main  element  in  the  actual  govern- 
ment of  the  country  will  be  the  mob  of  Paris,  or 
the  army  by  which  it  is  controlled,  —  the  general 
who  commands  the  latter,  or  the  demagogues  who 
rule  the  former. 

When  we  turn  from  France  to  Germany,  the 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE   GOSPELS.  177 

prospect  is  not  less  gloomy.  There  the  structure 
of  society  seems  to  be  falling  to  pieces,  without 
either  power  or  skill  for  its  reconstruction.  The 
false  philosophy  that  has  prevailed  in  that  country 
has  destroyed  in  a  great  degree  men's  ability  to 
reason,  and  substituted  visionary  theories  and  blind 
fanaticism  in  its  place.  It  has  not  only  unsettled 
all  just  notions  of  the  political  relations  of  men, 
but,  through  its  irreligious  and  demoralizing  char- 
acter, has  done  very  much  to  destroy  those  princi- 
ples on  which  all  right  conceptions  of  our  duties 
to  our  fellow-men,  and  all  right  feelings  toward 
them,  must  be  founded. 

THE  establishment  of  truth  in  those  departments 
of  science  which  concern  the  present  well-being  of 
men  as  members  of  civil  society  must  be  the  result 
of  the  correct  exercise  of  intellect.  In  order, 
therefore,  to  cultivate  those  departments  of  science 
successfully,  other  studies  are  requisite.  They  are 
those  which  inform  and  discipline  the  intellect,  so 
that  it  may  be  correctly  exercised.  They  are  those 
that  instruct  us  in  the  constitution  of  the  mind, 
its  powers,  and  the  manner  in  which  they  are  to  be 
employed,  —  that  make  known  to  us  the  causes  of 
our  intellectual  errors  and  misjudgments,  and  teach 


178  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

the  art  of  thinking  clearly  and  of  reasoning  justly, 
and  consequently,  what  is  implied  in  this,  the  art 
of  properly  using  words,  the  embodiments  and  the 
instruments  of  thought.  These  are  studies  which 
have  of  late  been  generally  neglected.  The  philos- 
ophy which  has  flourished  in  Germany  requires  no 
qualification  of  this  remark ;  on  the  contrary,  the 
reception  of  that  philosophy  there  and  elsewhere 
proves  its  correctness. 

The  intellectual  discipline  of  which  I  speak  is 
equally  necessary  for  the  establishment  of  the  truth 
in  those  higher  departments  of  knowledge  which 
essentially  concern  all  that  is  most  important  in  our 
being,  —  our  relations  to  God  and  to  eternity,  and 
our  fundamental  relations  to  our  fellow-men.  The 
study  of  these  subjects,  of  the  sciences  of  religion 
and  morals,  and  of  the  vast  body  of  facts  connect- 
ed with  them,  has  shared  with  us  the  neglect  into 
which  it  has  fallen  elsewhere.  There  is  no  strong 
prevailing  sense  of  the  importance  of  teaching  men 
to  think  and  reason  aright  concerning  them ;  no 
operative  conviction  of  the  importance  of  estab- 
lishing the  truth  concerning  them.  It  would  seem 
to  be  thought  that  the  solution  of  those  great 
problems,  the  true  or  the  false  solution  of  which 
affects  the  whole  of  character  and  conduct,  the 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       179 

well-being  of  men  equally  in  this  world  and  in  the 
next,  has  been  determined  by  traditionary  author- 
ity, or  may  be  left  to  men's  consciousness,  so  called, 
their  natural  instincts,  their  intuitions,  or  to  a  sort 
of  special  inspiration,  vouchsafed  to  those  who  do 
not  interfere  with  it  by  any  action  of  their  own 
minds ;  so  that  the  inquiry  after  truths  and  prin- 
ciples is  only  an  unprofitable  speculation.  The 
times  have  altered  since  the  most  eminent  theolo- 
gians and  moralists  of  their  respective  ages  were 
the  men  most  distinguished  for  their  intellectual 
powers  and  acquisitions,  such  men  as  Grotius  and 
Locke  and  Le  Clerc.  They  have  altered  since  the 
days  of  the  heathen  philosophers,  —  of  such  men 
as  Socrates  and  Plato  and  Cicero,  by  whom,  very 
imperfect  as  were  their  conceptions,  theology,  the 
science  of  things  divine,  was  regarded,  as  it  is,  as 
the  highest  philosophy. 

The  study  of  theology,  embracing  as  its  funda- 
mental requisite  the  study  of  Christianity,  is  essen- 
tially connected  with  almost  all  the  other  impor- 
tant branches  of  knowledge.  It  is-  connected  with 
the  natural  sciences ;  for  their  highest  value  con- 
sists in  making  known  to  us  the  works  of  God. 
It  stands  in  yet  another,  very  different,  relation  to 
them,  through  the  fact  that  the  progress  of  knowl- 


180  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

edge  in  some  of  these  sciences  has  brought  them 
into  conflict  with  false  doctrines  which  have  been 
zealously  represented  as  fundamental  in  Christian 
faith.  On  the  other  hand,  the  study  of  religion  is 
intimately  connected  with  the  whole  of  metaphys- 
ical science,  the  science  of  mind,  which  in  its  wid- 
est extent  embraces  all  our  knowledge  of  man's 
nature,  except  of  his  corporeal  part,  and  all  our 
knowledge  of  Him  who  formed  man  in  his  own 
likeness.  It  requires  the  study  of  the  languages 
which  introduce  us  to  an  acquaintance  with  the 
Old  World  as  it  existed  before  Christianity,  and 
which  thus  form  the  connecting  link  between 
ancient  and  modern  civilization.  It  is  blended 
throughout  with  the  history  of  opinions,  that  is, 
with  the  history  of  the  human  mind  and  character; 
for  in  the  formation  of  the  most  important  opinions, 
religion,  true  or  false,  has  been  the  main  agent, 
and  false  opinions  have  reacted  powerfully  on  re- 
ligion. It  has  other  connections,  which,  had  they 
not  been  so  neglected,  it  might  seem  unnecessary 
to  point  out.  If  religion  be  true,  if  Christian- 
ity be  a  revelation  from  God,  then  the  study  of 
religion,  of  Christianity,  and  of  morals,  which 
ought  to  be  based  on  Christianity,  should  enter 
as  the  most  essential  element  into  all  those  inqui- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  181 

ries  that  concern  the  social  and  political  relations 
of  men. 

But  the  tendency  of  our  times  is  to  disconnect 
the  truths  of  religion,  and  the  more  high  and 
comprehensive  principles  of  morality,  from  the 
discussion  of  those  subjects  of  politics  and  political 
economy  which  concern  immediately  the  present 
well-being  of  men.  I  will  take  a  single  example 
from  that  theory  concerning  the  causes  of  want, 
misery,  and  vice  which  teaches,  in  effect,  that  the 
more  fortunate  portion  of  men,  having  no  direct 
means  of  rendering  effectual  aid  to  the  suffering, 
have  no  important  duties  to  perform  towards 
them,  except  the  duty  of  providing  them  with 
clergymen  and  schoolmasters,  —  of  whose  proffered 
instruction  the  terrible  pressure  of  want  must  ren- 
der them  unapt  recipients, —  and  especially  the  du- 
ty of  exhorting  them  to  put  a  stop  to  the  increase 
of  population.  Compare  the  practical  deductions 
from  this  theory  with  the  spirit  which  pervades 
the  precepts  of  our  Saviour,  and  especially  with 
his  most  solemn  words,  —  not  their  verbal  mean- 
ing, for  in  that  no  man  of  sense  can  take  refuge 
from  their  true  purport,  but  with  the  spirit  of 
those  words :  —  "  Then  will  they  also  answer,  Lord, 
when  did  we  see  thee  hungry,  or  thirsty,  or  a  stran- 

16 


182        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ger,  or  naked,  or  sick,  or  in  prison,  and  did  not 
minister  to  thee  ]  Then  he  will  answer  them,  I  tell 
you  in  truth,  In  not  doing  so  to  one  of  the  hum- 
blest of  these,  you  did  not  do  so  to  me."  And  ob- 
serve further,  that  no  attempt  is  made  to  reconcile 
the  deductions  from  the  theory  in  question  with 
the  precepts  of  Christ. 

There  is  very  much  to  be  learned  and  to  be 
taught  in  the  science  of  religion,  and  the  twin 
science  of  morals.  As  regards  religion,  the  present 
anarchy  of  opinion  is  obviously  such,  that  this  re- 
mark requires  no  confirmation.  It  follows  as  a 
corollary  from  this  state  of  unsettled  opinion  con- 
cerning religion,  that  the  true  principles  of  moral 
action  have  not  been  established,  and  are  not  gen- 
erally understood.  This  again  may  be  asserted 
without  hazard,  as  it  is  made  evident  by  the  want 
of  agreement  concerning  them.  The  development 
and  application  of  the  supposed  principles  of  moral 
science  are  a  matter  of  still  greater  uncertainty, 
and  contrariety  of  opinion.  How  differently  are 
the  same  qualities  and  actions  estimated  by  differ- 
ent men !  With  what  opposite  sentiments  are  the 
same  characters  regarded !  —  I  mean,  of  course, 
when  the  facts  which  determine  the  character  are 
equally  well  known.  How  unlike  would  be  the 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  183 

judgment  of  a  "Hero-worshipper"  concerning  them 
to  that  of  a  Christian  philosopher !  What  admira- 
tion is  given  to  the  union  of  atrocious  wickedness 
with  great  intellectual  energy!  What  toleration 
is  shown  for  those  whose  vices  assume  the  garb  of 
pleasure,  in  whose  baskets  of  flowers  asps  lie  hid, 
and  who  purchase  their  indulgences  through  the 
degradation  and  misery  of  others  and  of  themselves ! 
What  contrary  decisions  are  pronounced  in  cases 
which  may  seem  to  present  a  conflict  of  duties  ! 
How  zealously  do  those  who  see  but  one  side  of 
such  questions  often  contend  that  right  is  to  be 
done  without  regard  to  consequences ;  as  if,  when 
a  doubt  may  arise,  there  were  other  modes  of  deter- 
mining what  is  right  and  wrong  beside  a  regard  to 
the  good  or  evil  consequences  of  conduct !  How 
differently  do  different  men  judge  of  the  lawfulness 
of  subscribing  to  the  Articles  and  conforming  to  the 
Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England,  by  those  who 
have  no  faith  in  many  of  its  doctrines  according  to 
the  obvious  meaning  of  the  words  in  which  they 
are  expressed !  —  doctrines  which,  thus  understood, 
no  intelligent  man  at  the  present  day,  who  has 
made  them  a  subject  of  conscientious  thought,  can 
persuade  himself  that  he  believes,  however  he  may 
persuade  himself  that  he  is  justified  in  giving  his 


184  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

aid  to  the  Church  to  impose  them  on  the  commu- 
nity as  doctrines  taught  by  God.  What  diversity 
of  judgment  exists  concerning  the  lawfulness  or 
unlawfulness  of  many  modes  of  action,  especially 
those  involved  in  the  internal  and  external  policy 
of  nations !  What  declamation  may  be  heard  about 
human  rights  from  teachers  without  any  correct 
notion,  often  without  any  notion  at  all,  of  what 
constitutes  a  right !  What  talk  about  conscience 
as  an  infallible  guide,  as  the  voice  of  God  in  our 
hearts,  with  the  reservation  that  this  infallible 
guide  must  be  well  instructed  by  us !  How  little 
are  our  obligations  to  our  fellow-men  understood, 
the  perpetual  control  which  they  should  have  over 
our  conduct,  the  extent  of  Christian  charity,  and 
the  necessary  modifications  of  its  exercise !  How 
few  men  think  much  on  these  subjects,  or  regulate 
their  conduct  by  a  regard  to  the  highest,  that  is, 
Christian  principles ! 

There  is,  as  I  have  said,  no  proper  provision 
made  in  our  literary  institutions  for  the  prosecu- 
tion of  those  studies  on  which  the  development  of 
the  intellect  and  character  mainly  depends.  They 
do  not  afford  to  the  generality  of  young  men  who 
resort  to  them  for  instruction  facilities  and  in- 
ducements adapted  to  lead  them  to  attend  to 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  185 

those  studies  with  interest  and  success.  Such 
young  men,  after  completing  their  course  of  edu- 
cation, often  pass  into  the  world  without  the 
knowledge  and  the  habits  of  reasoning  that  might 
enable  them  to  form  correct  opinions,  and  without 
a  strong  feeling,  which  there  has  been  nothing  to 
produce,  of  the  importance  of  truth  and  of  the  evil 
of  error.  As  regards  the  most  important  of  sub- 
jects, religion,  so  far  as  any  proper  discipline  of 
mind  is  concerned,  they  are  left  very  much  to  derive 
their  opinions  —  opinions  often  assented  to  rather 
than  embraced  —  from  accident,  from  traditional 
influences,  or  from  the  far  worse  influences  that 
may  act  upon  them  in  the  world.  It  may  be  said, 
that  instruction  in  all  that  relates  to  the  study  of 
religion  is  given  to  those  preparing  for  the  clerical 
profession  in  schools  expressly  intended  for  this 
purpose.  It  is  most  earnestly  to  be  wished  that 
these  schools,  collectively,  formed  a  more  important 
exception  to  the  remarks  which  have  been  made 
respecting  our  institutions  of  learning,  and  were  of 
more  avail  for  their  professed  end.  But  what  is  far 
more  desirable  is,  that  intellectual  men,  through- 
out the  community,  should  comprehend  that  the 
duty  of  understanding  the  religion  which  they  pro- 
fess is  not  a  duty  confined  to  a  particular  order. 

16* 


186        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

The  great  want  in  our  country  is  the  want  of  a 
body  of  men  whose  minds  have  been  so  informed 
and  so  disciplined  as  to  qualify  them  to  be  trust- 
worthy assistants  and  teachers  of  others  in  those 
branches  of  knowledge  which  concern  the  present 
well-being  and  the  unchangeable,  eternal  interests 
of  our  race,  —  a  body  of  men  so  enlightened,  that 
for  very  shame,  if  this  were  all,  they  could  not 
wilfully  countenance  essential  error,  and  who  might 
be  ever  ready  to  throw  the  weight  of  their  influence 
into  the  scale  of  public  opinion  to  counteract  it. 
How  such  a  body  of  men  is  to  be  formed  among 
us  is  a  question  which  cannot  here  be  treated. 
Various  suggestions  of  improvement  in  the  consti- 
tution of  our  seats  of  learning,  and  in  the  condi- 
tion of  our  clergy,  might  be  offered  and  discussed. 
But  we  have  been  led,  though  by  a  natural  and 
connected  train  of  thought  and  feeling,  to  a  sub- 
ject foreign  from  the  main  purpose  of  this  work ; 
and  this  is  not  the  place  to  enter  into  its  details. 

THE  publication  and  the  extended  reception  of 
such  books  as  that  of  Strauss,  —  and  there  have 
been  very  many  of  a  like  character,  —  and  the 
popularity  of  that  literature  of  infidelity  and  vice, 
that  "  literature  of  despair,"  as  it  was  called  by  one 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       187 

who  had  contributed  much  to  its  formation,  which 
has  been  connected  with  such  speculations,  are 
among  the  worst  indications  of  the  character  of 
our  age.  But  even  in  the  productions  of  scholars 
and  of  men  of  genius,  who  are  far  from  recklessly 
offending  against  religion  and  morals,  we  too  often 
miss  a  correct  tone  of  sentiment,  an  open,  high- 
minded,  manly  recognition  of  those  truths  which 
lie  at  the  foundation  of  all  virtue  and  happiness. 
Yet  only  in  proportion  as  they  are  recognized  can 
civilized  society,  where  it  is  now  thrown  into  such 
terrible  confusion,  be  happily  reorganized;  and 
where  its  elements  are  not  yet  broken  up,  its  pres- 
ervation must  depend  on  the  continuance,  and  its 
improvement  on  the  increase,  of  their  influence. 
We,  in  these  United  States,  share  in  the  same 
common  nature  with  the  inhabitants  of  those 
States  which  are  spread  over  the  more  southern 
portion  of  our  continent ;  and  nothing  has  saved 
us  from  the  same  anarchy  and  despotism,  the  same 
internal  commotions  and  wars,  with  all  their  at- 
tendant depravation  and  misery,  but  a  clearer 
perception  and  a  deeper  sense  of  the  truths  of 
religion  and  morals. 

Vous  etes   I'avenir  du  monde,  were  words  ad- 
dressed by  Madame  de  Stael  to  an  American,  a 


188       GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS. 

short  time  before  her  death.  Her  words  were 
true.  Through  the  providence  of  God,  and  the 
circumstances  in  which  he  has  placed  us,  we  have 
become  the  advanced  guard  of  the  civilized  world. 
Our  position  is  not  to  be  viewed  by  us  with  any 
foolish  spirit  of  vainglory,  but  with  a  strong  feel- 
ing of  our  great  responsibilities,  our  great  defi- 
ciencies, and  our  manifold  dangers.  One  truth  it 
should  impress  upon  us  most  deeply,  that  we  are 
not  to  look  to  the  prevailing  sentiments,  habits, 
and  moral  estimates  of  the  Old  World  as  guides 
for  our  opinions  or  conduct,  but  only  to  those 
eternal  principles  of  right  and  wrong,  which  the 
Lawgiver  of  the  Universe  has  sanctioned.  We 
are  acting  —  acting  for  good  or  evil  —  not  for  our- 
selves, nor  for  our  posterity,  alone.  Over  a  great 
part  of  the  civilized  world  the  heavens  are  covered 
with  thick  clouds.  But  there  is  light  still  shining 
in  the  West.  May  it  not  be  overcast.  May  it  be 
the  augury  of  a  better  day  for  mankind. 


PART    II. 


ON  THE 


INTERNAL    EVIDENCES 


OP   THE 


GENUINENESS    OF    THE    GOSPELS; 


BEING 


PORTIONS  OF  AN  UNFINISHED  WOKE. 


CHAPTER    I. 


THE  CONSISTENCY  OF  THE  NARRATIVE  IN  THE  GOSPELS 
WITH  ITSELF,  AND  WITH  ALL  OUR  KNOWLEDGE  BEARING 
ON  THE  SUBJECT. 


THE  ultimate  purpose  in  proving  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  Gospels  is  to  establish  their  authen- 
ticity. If  genuine,  they  are  the  works  of  Apos- 
tles, who  themselves  witnessed  the  actions  and 
heard  the  discourses  of  Christ ;  or  of  men  who 
during  a  great  part  of  their  lives  were  conver- 
sant with  Apostles,  and  derived  from  them  the 
information  which  they  have  given  us.  By  es- 
tablishing their  genuineness,  the  discussion  of 
their  authenticity  or  truth  is  reduced  within 
narrow  limits,  and  may  easily  be  decided.  These 
two  subjects,  however,  though  intimately  con- 
nected, are  in  their  own  nature  distinct,  and 
admit  of  separate  proof.  But  there  are  in  the 
Gospels  many  intrinsic  evidences  of  authenticity, 
which,  at  the  same  time,  are  evidences  of  genuine- 
ness. The  peculiar  character  of  these  histories  is 


192  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

such  as  to  show  that  they  proceeded  from  the 
pens  or  from  the  lips  of  those  who  witnessed 
what  is  related.  In  regard  to  this  internal  evi- 
dence, therefore,  the  two  subjects  require  to  be 
treated  in  connection. 

Among  those  proofs,  then,  equally  of  authen- 
ticity and  of  genuineness,  which  are  found  in  the 
Gospels,  one  of  the  most  important  may  be  thus 
stated.  In  the  narratives  of  the  Evangelists,  the 
existence  of  many  facts  which  are  not  expressly 
mentioned  is  implied.  In  order  to  understand 
fully  what  is  told,  and  to  perceive  its  bearing 
and  application,  we  must  take  into  view  very 
much  that  is  not  told.  There  is  to  be  found  in 
almost  every  part  of  the  Gospels  a  latent  refer- 
ence to  some  existing  state  of  things  which  is  not 
described.  But  when  we  attend  to  the  character 
of  those  facts  with  which  different  portions  of  the 
narrative  are  thus  connected,  we  find  that  they 
are  all  probable  or  certain  ;  that  we  have  distinct 
evidence  of  them  from  other  sources ;  or  that, 
supposing  the  truth  of  what  is  related  in  the 
Gospels,  and  viewing  this  in  connection  with  all 
our  other  knowledge  on  the  subject  in  question, 
they  are  such  as  must  or  might  have  existed. 
The  inferences  from  these  histories,  though  many 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  193 

and  various,  are  all  consistent  with  the  histories 
themselves,  and  with  whatever  we  can  learn  from 
other  sources.  In  tracing  out  the  necessary  or 
probable  bearing  of  those  actions  and  discourses 
which  are  recorded,  or  in  assigning  their  prob- 
able occasions  or  consequences,  we  detect  no 
inconsistency  with  the  history  itself,  and  find  no 
contradiction  of  known  facts ;  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, we  are  continually  perceiving  new  marks  of 
probability  and  truth.  This  coincidence  between 
what  is  told  and  what  is  implied,  this  correspond- 
ence between  the  actions  and  discourses  related 
and  that  state  of  things  and  series  of  events  to 
which  they  refer  as  existing  contemporaneously 
and  running  parallel  with  them,  does  not  appear 
here  and  there  only,  but  discovers  itself  through- 
out the  Gospels. 

But  this  consistency  of  the  narrative  with  itself, 
both  in  what  is  told  and  in  what  may  be  inferred 
from  it,  and  its  consistency  with  all  other  known 
facts  having  a  bearing  upon  it,  is  evidently  not 
the  work  of  study  or  artifice.  It  is  not  worth 
while  to  inquire  whether  it  could  in  any  case  be 
produced  by  such  means;  because  there  is  no 
dispute  that  the  whole  character  of  the  Gospels  is 
opposed  to  such  a  supposition.  They  are  very 

17 


194        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

inartificial  compositions.  If,  moreover,  the  coin- 
cidences of  which  we  speak  had  been  factitious, 
and  intended  to  give  an  air  of  probability  to  the 
narrative,  they  would  not  have  been  left  so  latent 
and  obscure  as  they  often  are.  The  writer  would 
have  taken  care  that  they  should  be  noticed  by 
the  reader.  On  the  contrary,  those  to  which  we 
particularly  refer  are  obviously  undesigned.  If, 
then,  the  appearances  which  have  been  described 
really  exist,  they  can  be  accounted  for  only  by 
the  truth  of  the  history.  It  is  impossible  that  a 
fiction  pretending  to  the  character  of  true  history, 
especially  a  fiction  relating  to  such  events  as  are 
recorded  in  the  Gospels,  should  be  so  consistent 
with  itself,  with  probability,  and  with  known  facts, 
in  such  a  number  and  variety  of  latent  coinci- 
dences. 

What  has  been  said  may  be  further  illustrated 
by  the  following  remarks.  In  the  Gospels,  Christ 
appears  as  a  divine  messenger  endued  with  mirac- 
ulous powers.  "We  learn  that  the  great  purpose 
of  his  ministry  was  the  moral  and  religious  refor- 
mation of  mankind;  and  accounts  are  given  of 
what  he  said  and  did  to  effect  this  purpose.  But 
we  find  in  these  books  only  some  very  general  and 
imperfect  notices  of  the  moral  and  intellectual 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  195 

character,  the  external  state,  the  manners,  usages, 
opinions,  prejudices,  and  passions  of  those  who 
were  the  immediate  subjects  of  his  ministry.  Re- 
specting these  topics,  however,  we  can  gain  much 
knowledge  from  a  variety  of  sources,  either  by  di- 
rect information  or  by  probable  inferences.  Now, 
in  proportion  as  our  knowledge  becomes  more  ac- 
curate and  extensive,  we  perceive  in  a  more  clear 
and  striking  manner  the  reference  and  adaptation 
of  what  Christ  is  represented  to  have  said  and  done 
to  the  character  and  circumstances  of  those  whom 
he  addressed,  as  well  as  its  consistency  with  the 
character  and  purpose  ascribed  to  Christ  him- 
self. But,  further,  the  claims  of  such  an  extra- 
ordinary teacher,  assuming  to  be  a  messenger  from 
God  himself,  his  miracles,  and  his  discourses,  must, 
admitting  the  representation  given  of  them  in  the 
Gospels,  have  produced,  in  their  operation  upon 
those  around  him,  consequences  of  a  very  remark- 
able character,  different  from  and  opposite  to  each 
other.  Such  a  preacher  could  not  have  acted 
upon  the  mass  of  the  Jewish  nation,  or  upon  those 
individuals  with  whom  he  was  more  nearly  con- 
nected, without  causing  very  marked  and  extra- 
ordinary phenomena  as  the  result  of  his  minis- 
try. But  here,  again,  the  different  effects  of  our 


196        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

Saviour's  ministry  are  but  very  partially  described 
in  the  Gospels;  and  an  explanation  of  these  ef- 
fects by  a  reference  to  the  different  circumstances 
of  his  hearers,  or  to  their  different  states  of  mind, 
is  scarcely,  if  at  all,  attempted.  What  is  not  told, 
however,  is  often  unconsciously  implied ;  and  what 
is  implied  is  always  what  we  might  expect,  or  what 
we  can  account  for  as  necessary  or  probable.  In 
proportion,  likewise,  as  we  attain  a  more  just  and 
comprehensive  view  of  the  effects  of  his  preaching, 
we  perceive  the  occasion  of  many  facts,  and  the  im- 
mediate purpose  of  many  discourses,  which  are  not 
stated  in  the  narrative,  and  of  which,  therefore,  we 
may  have  had  before  no  right  conception.  These 
coincidences  are  so  numerous,  and  at  the  same 
time  so  obviously  unstudied,  as  to  give  to  the 
whole  history  the  most  decisive  marks  of  truth, 
those  which  cannot  be  imitated. 

The  argument  which  it  has  been  my  purpose  to 
state,  if  just,  is  important ;  and  it  is  one  not  often, 
if  at  all,  adverted  to.  I  may,  therefore,  be  excused 
for  presenting  it  under  a  still  different  form. 

There  is,  then,  in  the  Gospels,  a  great  deal  that 
requires  explanation.  The  narrative  is  often  im- 
perfect. We  do  not  at  once  perceive  the  meaning, 
relation,  and  purpose  of  much,  which,  we  are  told, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  197 

was  said  or  done  by  Christ  or  by  others.  We  can- 
not, without  examination  and  thought,  refer  the  ac- 
tions and  discourses  recorded  to  that  state  of  mind 
in  the  speaker,  or  to  that  existing  state  of  things, 
by  which  they  were  occasioned.  In  order  to  un- 
derstand different  portions  of  these  books,  we  are 
obliged  to  take  into  consideration  many  circum- 
stances not  expressly  recorded,  or  not  recorded  in 
connection  with  the  portion  to  be  explained.  In 
the  careful  study  of  these  writings,  therefore,  we 
bring  together  a  great  variety  of  facts,  which,  cor- 
responding with  different  parts  of  the  narrative, 
serve  to  explain  what  the  writers  themselves  have 
left  unexplained.  We  regard  these  in  connection 
with  the  general  view  which  they  have  given  us 
of  the  character  of  Christ  and  the  purpose  of  his 
ministry.  We  thus  obtain  something  like  a  full 
and  correct  conception  of  that  state  of  things  and 
series  of  events,  not  expressly  related,  which  must 
have  accompanied  the  ministry  of  Christ,  suppos- 
ing the  truth  of  what  is  actually  related  concern- 
ing it.  But  of  this  state  of  things  and  series 
of  events  only  a  very  partial  account  is  given  in 
the  Gospels.  The  narratives  in  these  writings, 
however,  accord  with  all  that  we  can  learn  or  rea- 
sonably infer  respecting  the  subject.  But  there  is 

17* 


198        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

something  more  to  be  said.  The  narratives  in  the 
Gospels  require,  for  their  explanation,  to  be  con- 
sidered in  connection  with  all  our  knowledge  con- 
cerning the  subjects  to  which  they  relate.  They 
are  but  fragments  of  the  great  history  of  the  times  ; 
and  we  must  complete  the  tablet,  as  far  as  we  can, 
in  order  to  perceive  their  proper  place  and  connec- 
tion. Now  such  a  consistency  between  fiction  or 
error,  on  the  one  hand,  and  truth  and  probability, 
on  the  other,  that  the  latter  should  be  required  to 
explain  the  former,  may  fairly  be  regarded  as  im- 
possible. If  the  Gospels  were  not  true,  we  could 
not  succeed  in  explaining  them  by  attempting  to 
do  so  in  the  manner  described ;  that  is,  by  proceed- 
ing throughout  on  the  false  supposition  of  their 
being  true.  In  such  a  case,  our  facts  and  infer- 
ences, instead  of  continually  affording  new  illus- 
tration, would  be  continually  presenting  new  con- 
tradictions, inconsistencies,  and  difficulties.  This 
argument  applies  with  peculiar  force  to  the  Gos- 
pels,—  with  far  greater  force  than  to  any  other 
writings  whatever;  because  the  Gospels  contain 
accounts  of  events  so  extraordinary,  and  which 
must  have  had  such  important  bearings  and  rela- 
tions ;  and  because  they  are  composed  so  inartifi- 
cially,  the  narratives  contained  in  them  are  so 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       199 

often  imperfect,  facts  are  so  nakedly  recorded, 
with  so  little  explanation  and  so  few  circumstances, 
and  the  relation  of  different  portions  to  each 
other,  or  to  what  is  not  stated  in  the  books  them- 
selves, is  so  rarely  pointed  out.  From  the  nature 
of  the  facts  related,  they  are  subjected  to  the 
strongest  test  of  credibility,  and  at  the  same  time, 
from  the  mode  of  their  relation,  there  is  a  con- 
stant demand  for  explanation.  We  are  continu- 
ally obliged  to  bring  what  is  before  us  into  com- 
parison with  what  we  know  from  other  sources, 
or  with  what  we  may  reasonably  or  consistently 
suppose  to  be  true. 

It  appears,  therefore,  that  the  writers  of  the 
Gospels  had,  generally  speaking,  a  very  just  and 
lively  conception  of  that  most  extraordinary  state 
of  things,  and  of  those  numerous  facts  and  cir- 
cumstances, which  must  or  which  might  have 
existed  if  their  history  be  true,  but  which  cer- 
tainly did  not  exist  if  it  be  a  fiction.  Supposing 
the  truth  of  the  Gospels,  the  justness  of  this  con- 
ception is  easily  accounted  for.  It  was  the  result 
of  personal  knowledge  and  experience.  Their 
writers  were  themselves  familiar  with  the  facts 
relating  to  the  history  of  Christ,  or  derived  their 
knowledge  from  those  who  were  so.  But,  sup- 


200  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF   THE 

posing  the  Gospels  to  be  narratives  not  of  real, 
but  of  fictitious  events,  then  it  could  have  been 
only  by  a  most  vigorous  and  most  singular  effort 
of  imagination,  that  the  writers  of  them  thus 
brought  before  their  minds  all' the  bearings  of 
different  portions  of  these  narratives  upon  a  state 
of  things  not  described,  and  the  numerous  partic- 
ulars and  important  consequences  involved  in  the 
supposed  truth  of  the  wonderful  events  which  they 
relate.  These  writers  must,  at  the  same  time,  have 
exercised  an  unaccountable  forbearance  in  leaving 
the  connections  and  bearings  of  their  narratives  so 
obscure,  and  in  not  pointing  out  or  intimating  to 
their  readers  what  might  appear  to  explain  or  con- 
firm their  relations  in  so  striking  a  manner.  The 
extraordinary  faculties  supposed,  and  this  extraor- 
dinary use  of  them,  must  likewise  have  been  found, 
not  in  one  only,  but  in  four  contemporary  individ- 
uals. But  it  is  useless  to  multiply  objections  to 
an  hypothesis  so  improbable  as  to  give  an  air  of 
trifling  to  the  arguments  brought  against  it.  I 
will,  therefore,  only  add,  that  it  would  imply  a  fact 
opposite  to  the  evident  and  undisputed  character 
of  these  histories ;  that  is,  it  would  imply  that  they 
were  works  of  consummate  skill  and  artifice. 
The  appearances  in  the  Gospels,  if  they  are 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  201 

such  as  have  been  stated,  admit  of  no  other  ex- 
planation, than  that  the  narratives  rest  on  the 
authority  of  those  who  were  witnesses  of  what  is 
related,  and  were  themselves  concerned  in  the 
transactions  recorded.  It  follows,  therefore,  that 
these  histories  were  committed  to  writing  either 
by  some  of  the  immediate  disciples  of  Christ,  or  by 
persons  who  derived,  generally  speaking,  correct 
and  particular  information  from  such  disciples. 
But  if  this  conclusion  be  admitted,  no  important 
doubt  can  remain  that  they  are  the  works  of  those 
particular  individuals  to  whom  they  have  always 
been  ascribed.  Their  character  establishes  the 
truth  of  the  testimony  to  their  genuineness. 

THE  argument  which  I  have  endeavored  to 
state  is  of  the  kind  technically  called  cumulative. 
Its  strength  does  not  appear  in  any  individual 
case,  but  in  the  number  and  accumulation  of  in- 
stances which  may  be  adduced.  Its  whole  force 
is  to  be  perceived  only  by  a  careful  and  judicious 
study  of  the  Gospels.  In  proportion  as  they  are 
better  understood,  the  latent  marks  of  truth  which 
run  through  every  part  of  them  will  become  more 
apparent  and  irresistible.  All  I  shall  now  attempt 
will  be  to  give  a  very  few  examples  of  its  applica- 


202  INTEENAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

tion,  in  order  to  afford  some  illustration  of  its  na- 
ture. 

In  the  eighteenth  chapter  of  the  Gospel  of 
St.  Matthew,  we  find  a  narrative  which  may  be 
thus  rendered. 

"  That  day  the  disciples  came  to  Jesus,  saying, 
Who  then  is  to  be  greatest  in  the  kingdom  of 
Heaven  ?  And  Jesus  called  a  child  to  him,  and 
placed  him  in  the  midst  of  them,  and  said,  I 
tell  you  in  truth,  Unless  you  are  changed  and 
become  as  children,  you  will  not  enter  the  king- 
dom of  Heaven.  He,  then,  who  shall  become 
humble,  and  be  like  this  child,  will  be  the  greatest 
in  the  kingdom  of  Heaven.  And  he  who  gives 
a  kind  reception  to  one  such  child  for  my  sake, 
gives  a  kind  reception  to  me.  But  should  any 
one  cause  the  humblest  believer  in  me  to  fall 
away  from  me,  it  would  be  better  for  him  that  he 
should  have  a  millstone  hung  round  his  neck, 
and  be  swallowed  up  in  the  depths  of  the  sea. 
Woe  for  the  world  on  account  of  the  hindrances 
to  my  reception!  Such  hindrances  must  exist; 
but  woe  for  him  through  whom  they  exist ! 

"  If  your  hand  or  your  foot  would  cause  you  to 
fall  away  from  me,  cut  it  off  and  cast  it  from  you. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  203 

It  is  better  for  you  to  enter  into  life  having  but  one 
foot  or  one  hand,  than,  having  two  hands  or  two 
feet,  to  be  cast  into  the  eternal  fire.  And  if  your 
eye  be  causing  you  to  fall  away,  pluck  it  out  and 
cast  it  from  you.  It  is  better  for  you  to  enter 
into  life  having  but  one  eye,  than,  having  two 
eyes,  to  be  cast  into  the  fire  of  hell. 

"  See  that  you  despise  not  any  one  of  the  hum- 
blest of  my  disciples ;  for  I  tell  you,  that  their 
angels  in  heaven  continually  behold  the  face  of  my 
Father  in  heaven.  The  Son  of  Man  has  come  to 
save  the  lost.  What  think  you  ]  If  a  man  have 
a  hundred  sheep,  and  one  of  them  has  gone  astray, 
will  he  not  leave  the  ninety-nine  upon  the  moun- 
tains, and  go  and  seek  that  which  has  gone 
astray  1  And  if  he  find  it,  truly  I  say  to  you, 
he  rejoices  more  over  it  than  over  the  ninety-nine 
which  had  not  strayed.  Even  so  it  is  not  the 
will  of  your  Father  in  heaven  that  one  of  the 
humblest  of  these  should  be  lost. 

"  If  your  brother  sin  against  you,  go  alone  to 
him  and  show  him  his  fault.  If  he  listen  to  you, 
you  have  gained  your  brother.  But  if  he  do  not 
listen  to  you,  go  to  him  yet  again  with  one  or  two 
others,  that  everything  may  be  settled  by  the 
words  of  two  or  three  witnesses.  And  if  he  dis- 


- 

204:       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

regard  them,  tell  the  matter  to  the  assembly  of 
brethren;  and  if  he  disregard  the  assembly,  let 
him  be  to  you  as  a  heathen  and  a  tax-gatherer. 

"  Truly  I  say  to  you,  Whatever  you  forbid  on 
earth  will  be  forbidden  in  heaven,  and  whatever 
you  permit  on  earth  will  be  permitted  in  heav- 
en. Again,  I  say  to  you,  If  two  of  you  agree  on 
earth  concerning  everything  which  they  ask,  their 
prayers  will  be  granted  by  my  Father  in  heaven. 
For  where  two  or  three  have  met  together  in  my 
service,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them. 

"  Then  Peter  came  to  him  and  said,  Master,  if 
my  brother  sin  against  me,  how  often  shall  I 
forgive  him1?  till  seven  times'?  Jesus  answered 
him,  I  say  not,  Till  seven  times ;  but,  Till  seventy 
times  seven." 

I  will  now  endeavor  to  explain  this  narrative, 
for  the  purpose  of  pointing  out  its  intrinsic  marks 
of  truth.  It  has  reference  to  a .  state  of  things 
nowhere  described  by  the  Evangelist,  but  which 
was  the  natural  result  of  facts  related  by  him,  or 
known  to  us  from  other  sources.  The  narrative 
forms  a  counterpart  to  this  state  of  things.  It 
bears  its  impression  and  implies  its  existence. 
But  this  coincidence  is  clearly  undesigned  by  the 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  205 

writer.  It  is  not  to  be  ascribed  to  his  skill  and 
artifice.  It  therefore  affords  evidence  at  once  of 
the  truth  of  the  narrative  itself,  and  of  the  actual 
existence  of  that  state  of  things  which  we  sup- 
pose it  to  imply.  Of  this  we  will  now  give  some 
account. 

It  was,  as  is  well  known,  the  general  expecta- 
tion of  the  Jews,  that  their  Messiah  would  be  a 
temporal  prince,  ruling  over  the  world.  At  the 
period  to  which  this  narrative  relates,  the  Apos- 
tles shared  in  the  common  error  and  expectation 
of  their  countrymen.  Their  prejudices  and  pas- 
sions clung  to  this  false  conception.  A  little  be- 
fore this  time  our  Saviour  had  expressly  assented 
to  the  declaration  of  Peter  affirming  him  to  be  the 
Messiah.  His  Apostles,  therefore,  regarding  him 
as  sustaining  this  character,  looked  forward  with 
undefined  hopes  to  his  assuming  the  power  and 
splendor  of  the  greatest  of  earthly  monarchs. 
But  they  had  been  invited  by  Christ  to  connect 
themselves  with  him ;  they  had  joined  him  while 
he  was  yet  in  comparative  obscurity  and  his 
claims  were  not  generally  acknowledged,  and 
they  had  been  distinguished  by  his  peculiar 
regard.  For  themselves,  therefore,  they  naturally 
expected  that  they  should  be  hereafter  among  his 

18 


206        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

favorites  and  chief  officers.  With  these  feelings, 
they  had  begun  to  contend  with  each  other  about 
their  future  comparative  rank  in  the  kingdom 
of  the  Messiah.  Jealousies  had  sprung  up  ;  mu- 
tual offence  had  been  taken ;  and  they  were  be- 
coming at  enmity  with  each  other.  Even  at  a 
subsequent  period,  the  other  disciples,  we  are 
told,  were  moved  with  indignation  at  James  and 
John  for  the  ambitious  views  which  they  still 
cherished,  notwithstanding  our  Saviour's  present 
reproof.  But  all  their  hopes  of  worldly  ambition 
were  unfounded;  and  the  whole  state  of  mind 
described  was  at  variance  with  the  character  re- 
quired in  the  disciples  and  ministers  of  him  whose 
kingdom  was  not  of  this  world. 

Our  Saviour,  therefore,  addressing  his  Apostles, 
begins  with  an  inculcation  of  humility,  and  of  the 
necessity  of  a  total  change  in  their  feelings  and 
purposes.  Without  this,  they  could  not  even  be 
members  of  his  kingdom.  The  bearing  of  what 
immediately  follows  may  not  be  perceived  without 
some  further  remarks. 

Peter,  James,  and  John  appear  to  have  been 
eminent  among  the  Apostles  for  their  personal 
character.  They  were,  on  different  occasions, 
particularly  distinguished  by  Christ.  John  was 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  207 

known  as  the  disciple  whom  he  loved.  He  had 
declared  that  Peter  was  a  rock  on  which  he  would 
build  his  Church.  He  had  selected  the  three  to 
witness  his  transfiguration;  and  upon  this  occa- 
sion, they  were  separated  with  their  Master  during 
a  day  and  a  night  from  the  rest  of  the  Apostles, 
for  a  purpose  which  remained  unknown  to  the 
latter  for  a  considerable  period.  They  evidently 
had  founded  peculiar  expectations  upon  the  dis- 
tinction which  they  had  enjoyed.  They  appear  to 
have  assumed  an  air  of  superiority,  to  which  the 
other  disciples  were  unwilling  to  submit,  and 
which  led  to  altercation  and  mutual  ill-will.  They 
probably  felt  and  expressed  a  degree  of  contempt 
for  the  rude  and  slow  conceptions  and  uninformed 
minds  of  some  of  their  associates ;  perhaps  even  for 
their  unambitious  views,  and  for  a  state  of  feeling 
and  character  more  conformed  to  the  spirit  of  our 
religion  than  their  own.  There  was  probably  a 
rivalship  among  the  three  we  have  mentioned ; 
between  Peter,  on  the  one  side,  and  James  and 
John,  on  the  other.  It  may  be  presumed,  likewise, 
that  the  rest  of  the  Apostles  shared  in  the  feelings 
described,  according  to  the  notions  which  they  re- 
spectively entertained  of  their  claims  to  the  favor 
of  their  Master.  But  this  assumption  of  superior- 


208        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ity,  these  rivalships  and  dissensions,  would  tend  to 
alienate  many  of  the  disciples,  especially  those 
treated  as  inferiors.  They  would  be  offended  and 
driven  away  from  Christ.  Our  Saviour,  therefore, 
proceeds  to  speak  of  the  interest  which  he  felt  in 
all  his  followers.  He  who  should  show  kindness 
to  any  one  of  them,  though  he  were  but  as  a  child, 
on  account  of  his  relation  to  Christ,  might  be  re- 
garded as  showing  kindness  to  Christ  himself. 
He  insists  in  the  strongest  terms  upon  the  guilt 
of  causing  any  one  of  his  disciples  to  be  offended 
with  him,  or  to  fall  away.  There  would  be  sin  in 
apostasy ;  there  would  be  sin  in  giving  occasion  to 
apostasy.  Through  either  act,  one  would  forfeit 
the  privileges  and  blessings  of  a  Christian.  But 
there  was  danger  of  both ;  and  our  Saviour,  there- 
fore, speaks  of  the  evil  and  ruin  of  such  sin.  It 
was  to  be  avoided  at  any  sacrifice,  by  giving  up 
the  strongest  feelings  and  passions,  by  cutting  off 
a  limb  or  plucking  out  an  eye.  He  then  warns 
those  whom  he  is  addressing,  not  to  despise  one 
of  the  humblest  of  his  disciples.  They  were  all 
objects  of  the  care  of  God.  The  purpose  of 
his  own  mission  was  to  seek  and  save  the  lost. 
He  had  come  to  rescue  men  from  error,  sin,  and 
misery.  The  deliverance  of  a  single  individual, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  209 

however  humble,  was  most  earnestly  to  be  desired 
and  promoted.  God  might  be  regarded  as  holding 
the  same  relation  to  his  disciples,  as  a  shepherd 
to  his  flock ;  not  willing  that  any  should  be  lost. 
He  then  teaches  them  how  to  compose  those  dif- 
ferences which  had  arisen.  The  party  injured 
was  to  seek  reconciliation,  and  endeavor  to  lead 
his  brother  to  better  feelings.  If  unsuccessful,  he 
was  still  to  repeat  his  efforts,  taking  with  him 
others  who  might  use  their  influence  to  the  same 
end.  He  was  finally  to  call  upon  the  whole  body 
of  disciples  to  interpose  their  persuasions  and 
authority  ;  and  he  who  should  persevere  in  ill-will, 
in  opposition  to  all  these  means,  was  no  longer  to 
be  considered  as  a  brother. 

The  words  which  follow  are  not  particularly 
connected  with  these  directions,  but  generally  with 
the  whole  discourse.  Our  Saviour,  having  at- 
tempted to  repress  all  improper  pride  and  ambi- 
tion in  his  disciples,  teaches  them  their  real  dig- 
nity and  authority  as  ministers  of  his  religion. 
As  such  they  were  ministers  of  God  to  declare 
what  He  forbade  and  what  He  commanded.  The 
precepts  and  directions  given  by  them  as  announ- 
cing his  will  would  be  ratified  in  heaven.  The 
jealousies  and  dissensions  among  the  Apostles 

18* 


210  INTEENAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

appear  to  have  arisen  in  part  from  what  our  Sav- 
iour had  formerly  said  to  Peter :  "  What  you 
shall  forbid  on  earth  will  be  forbidden  in  heaven, 
and  what  you  shall  permit  on  earth  will  be  per- 
mitted in  heaven."  *  In  the  present  discourse,  in 
order  to  do  away  any  claim  of  superiority  which 
Peter  might  have  founded  on  this  address,  and  to 
prevent  it  from  being  a  ground  of  dissension, 
Christ  repeats  the  same  words,  and  extends  the 
declaration  to  all  his  Apostles.  He  then  speaks 
further  of  their  interest  with  God  as  ministers  of 
his  religion.  But  he  connects  this  with  a  new 
recommendation  of  concord  and  unity.  As  min- 
isters of  his  religion,  they  were  to  be  united  in 
their  purposes,  wishes,  and  prayers ;  and  they 
might  then  be  secure  of  God's  peculiar  assistance 
and  favor.  What  they  should  supplicate  in  com- 
mon, as  servants  of  Christ,  with  such  feelings  as 
he  required,  would  be  granted  by  God.  It  would 
be  as  if  Christ  himself  were  praying  with  them. 

When  we  understand  the  occasion  and  bearing 
of  the  discourse,  we  perceive,  at  once,  the  coinci- 
dence in  what  is  related  of  Peter.  "Then  Peter 
came  to  him  and  said,  Master,  if  my  brother  sin 

*  Matthew  xvi.  19. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       211 

against  me,  how  often  shall  I  forgive  him  ?  "  Pe- 
ter, it  is  probable,  had  been  particularly  exasper- 
ated in  the  controversy  concerning  pre-eminence; 
and  nothing,  in  his  consequent  state  of  feeling, 
could  be  more  natural  than  this  question.  But 
this  coincidence,  like  all  the  others  which  have 
been  pointed  out,  is  left  without  being  in  any  way 
indicated  by  the  Evangelist. 

It  will  be  perceived  that,  in  explaining  this  pas- 
sage, we  go  upon  the  assumption,  that  the  char- 
acter and  office  of  Christ  were  such  as  they  are 
described  in  the  Gospels.  We  are  obliged  to 
suppose  that  his  Apostles  had  become  convinced 
that  he  was  the  Messiah,  the  most  extraordinary 
messenger  from  God  to  men  of  whom  the  Jews 
had  an  imagination.  We  next  take  into  view 
what  we  learn  from  other  sources  was  the  concep- 
tion which  the  Jews  had  formed  of  the  character 
and  office  of  the  Messiah.  We  infer  that  this 
conception  was  entertained  by  the  Apostles.  We 
then  consider  what  was  the  natural  effect  of  their 
belief  upon  their  minds,  in  the  circumstances  in 
which  the  history  represents  them  to  have  been 
placed.  And  we  bring  to  bear  upon  the  present 
passage  inferences  from  facts  elsewhere  recorded, 
the  connection  of  which  is  not  pointed  out  by  the 


212        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

historian.  Pursuing  this  method,  we  perceive  that 
the  narrative  is  consistent  with  all  that  is  else- 
where expressly  told;  and  with  all  that  may  be 
inferred  from  what  is  told,  when  viewed  in  con- 
nection with  our  other  knowledge.  This  consist- 
ency extends  itself  to  those  relations  which  are 
not  brought  into  view  by  the  writer.  It  is  clearly 
unstudied.  But  in  this  passage  we  have  merely 
a  specimen  of  the  sort  of  illustration  which  the 
Gospels  throughout  admit  and  require,  and  of 
the  results  which  follow  from  its  application. 

WE  will  proceed  to  another  example, — the  story 
of  the  young  man  who  came  to  Christ  addressing 
him :  "  Good  teacher,  what  good  thing  shall  I  do 
to  have  eternal  life  1 "  *  The  false  notions  which 
the  Jews  entertained  of  religion  and  its  obligations 
were  similar  to  those  which  have  very  commonly 
prevailed.  They  did  not  regard  it  as  the  sole 
governing  principle  of  the  affections  and  conduct ; 
but  rather  as  enjoining  a  distinct  and  peculiar  set 
of  observances,  a  regard  to  which,  though  consist- 
ent with  great  moral  depravity,  was  looked  upon 
as  constituting  the  religious  character.  According 

*  Matthew  xix.  16. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  213 

to  them,  religion  consisted  in  keeping  their  Law 
and  their  traditions.  But  of  the  extent  and  force 
of  the  moral  requisitions  of  the  Law  they  had 
but  a  very  imperfect  conception;  and  to  keep 
the  Law  was  with  them  but  little  more  than  to 
observe  its  ceremonies  according  to  the  glosses 
and  with  the  additions  of  their  Rabbins.  The 
case  was  with  them  as  it  has  since  been  with 
large  bodies  of  Christians.  Kites  and  arbitrary 
observances  had  in  their  minds  taken  the  place 
of  moral  duties.  The  young  man  who  came 
to  Christ,  though  he  may  have  had  some  better 
and  higher  notions,  appears  to  have  possessed 
in  a  great  degree  the  common  character  of  his 
countrymen,  and  especially  of  the  leading  men 
among  them,  to  whose  number  he  belonged.  Re- 
garding our  Saviour  as  a  new  and  extraordinary 
teacher,  he  appears  to  have  thought  that  he 
might  enjoin  upon  him  some  new  and  peculiar 
observance  as  a  means  of  obtaining  God's  favor ; 
something  not  commanded  in  the  Law,  and  which 
others  had  not  practised. 

To  the  address  of  the  young  man  our  Saviour 
replied:  "Why  do  you  call  me  good?  None 
is  good  except  God  alone.  But  if  you  would 
enter  into  life,  keep  the  commandments."  The 


214  INTEKNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

object  of  the  first  part  of  our  Saviour's  answer 
was  to  refer  the  young  man  from  himself  as  a 
teacher,  to  Qod ;  to  give  him  to  understand  that 
no  precepts  were  of  any  authority  except  as  they 
proceeded  from  God ;  that  there  was  no  other  good 
teacher  to  whom  he  was  to  look  for  directions  by 
which  eternal  life  might  be  obtained.  According- 
ly, the  purport  of  what  he  adds  is  this:  If  you 
would  enter  into  life,  obey  the  commandments  of 
God.  The  subsequent  question  of  the  young  man 
implies,  conformably  to  what  has  been  said,  that 
he  was  seeking  for  some  peculiar,  and,  if  I  may 
so  say,  some  compendious  mode  of  obtaining  fu- 
ture blessedness ;  for  he  asks  which  of  the  com- 
mandments he  should  keep,  as  if  there  were  no 
obligation  to  obey  them  all.  Our  Saviour,  then, 
in  opposition  to  the  common  error  of  the  age, 
directs  him  to  the  moral  precepts  of  the  Law, 
mentioning  particularly  a  few  of  these,  as  speci- 
mens and  representatives  of  the  whole.  The 
young  man,  with  a  confidence  which  discovered 
too  high  an  opinion  of  himself  and  too  narrow 
conceptions  of  his  duty,  replied,  "All  these 
precepts  have  I  kept  from  my  youth;  in  what 
am  I  still  wanting  ? "  Our  Saviour's  preceding 
answer  was  not  intended  as  a  full  reply.  There 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  215 

was,  now  that  he  had  come  as  a  messenger  from 
God,  an  occasion  and  a  call  for  high  virtues  and 
great  sacrifices,  such  as  had  not  previously  been 
demanded.  Men  were  summoned  to  become  his 
disciples,  and  his  disciples  were  to  take  up  the 
cross  and  follow  him ;  to  give  themselves  up  to 
his  cause ;  to  lay  aside  all  regard  to  their  worldly 
interests ;  and  to  expose  themselves  as  marks  for 
persecution.  Our  Saviour  proposed  to  the  young 
man  no  easier  and  no  harder  terms  than  he  pro- 
posed to  all  his  followers.  The  excellence,  he 
tells  him,  of  which  you  are  ambitious,  is  to  be 
obtained  by  devoting  yourself  to  my  service,  by 
becoming  my  follower;  but  to  this  end  it  is 
necessary  to  divest  yourself  of  all  care  for  merely 
earthly  concerns.  The  direction  at  first  sight 
may  seem  to  be  severe,  and  to  have  imposed  an 
unnecessary  trial;  and  it  is  left  unexplained  by 
the  Evangelist.  But  when  we  bring  into  view 
the  existing  state  of  things,  we  find  it  to  be  such 
as  this  state  of  things  demanded ;  and  we  perceive 
its  consistency  with  what  was  uniformly  required 
by  Christ  of  his  disciples. 

The  young  man  went  away  sorrowful,  and  our 
Saviour  turned  to  his  disciples  to  remark,  in  the 
strong,  figurative  language  of  the  East,  upon  the 


216        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

moral  impossibility  that  those  of  the  class  to  which 
he  belonged  should  give  up  wealth,  ease,  pleasures, 
and  honors,  to  become  his  disciples.  But  their 
thoughts  still  dwelt  upon  an  earthly  kingdom ; 
and  could  this  hold  out  no  rewards  to  tempt  men 
to  become  his  followers  1  Was  the  whole  course 
of  his  disciples  through  life  to  be  one  of  privation, 
labor,  and  suffering  ]  "  Who  then,"  they  ask, 
"  can  be  saved "? "  That  is,  How  are  you  to  col- 
lect followers'?  How  is  your  kingdom  to  be  es- 
tablished ?  —  It  is  to  this  indirect  meaning  of 
the  question,  I  conceive,  that  the  reply  of  Christ 
is  directed.  Men  would  be  saved,  his  religion 
would  be  established,  not  by  human  means,  but 
by  displays  of  the  power  of  God. 

Peter  then,  with  feelings  similar  to  those  which 
have  been  before  described,  brings  forward  the 
claims  of  the  Apostles :  "  Lo !  we  have  left  all 
to  become  your  followers.  What  then  will  be 
our  reward?"  Our  Saviour  answers  him  in 
strong,  metaphorical  language,  borrowing  the 
figure  which  he  uses  from  the  thoughts  which 
possessed  their  minds.  "  And  Jesus  said  to  them, 
I  tell  you  in  truth,  that  you,  my  followers,  in  the 
regeneration,  when  the  Son  of  Man  shall  sit  on 
the  throne  of  his  glory,  shall  also  sit  on  twelve 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE  GOSPELS.  217 

thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel."*  It 
was  thus  that  he  not  unfrequently  adopted  the 
language  in  which  his  hearers  might  express 
their  ideas,  and  conformed  it  to  the  expression  of 
his  own ;  in  this  manner  facilitating  the  reception 
of  the  latter  by  their  minds.  The  expectations  of 
his  Apostles  would  not  be  literally  gratified,  but 
they  would  be  gratified  in  a  much  higher  sense. 
When  men  should  be  regenerated  by  his  religion, 
when  his  spiritual  kingdom  should  be  established, 
they,  his  Apostles,  would  be  regarded  as  next 
to  him  in  authority  and  dignity.  For  all  their 
sacrifices,  he  proceeds  to  say,  they  should  receive 
a  hundred  fold,  and  should  inherit  eternal  life. 

But  the  parable  which  follows,  of  the  laborers 
in  a  vineyard,  is  intended  to  correct  any  false 
hopes,  improper  confidence,  or  undue  estimation 
of  themselves,  which  these  promises  might  other- 
wise have  excited  in  the  Apostles.  They  might 
naturally  think  that  the  mere  circumstance  of 
their  early  adherence  to  our  Saviour,  their  being 
his  first,  or  among  his  first,  followers,  would 

*  It  having  been  in  ancient  times  common  in  the  East  for  kings 
to  act  as  judges,  the  whole  exercise  of  regal  authority  was  sometimes 
denoted  by  the  word  judging,  as  it  is  metaphorically  in  the  present 
passage.  "  The  twelve  tribes  of  Israel "  is  a  figurative  expression 
for  the  whole  people  of  God. 
19 


218  INTEENAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

entitle  them  to  peculiar  rewards.  This  might 
reasonably  be  expected  by  the  followers  of  an 
earthly  leader.  But  the  object  of  this  parable 
was  to  teach  them  that  the  future  recompense  of 
men  would  not  be  affected  by  their  becoming  his 
followers  early  or  late,  if  they  became  such  as 
soon  as  invited.  It  would  depend  only  on  their 
moral  excellence.  In  this  respect  many  of  those 
who  became  converts  at  a  later  period  might  be 
superior  to  others  who  earlier  professed  themselves 
his  disciples.  The  last  might  be  first,  and  the 
first  last. 

IN  explaining  the  passages  which  we  have  gone 
over,  we  are  obliged  to  suppose  much  that  is 
nowhere  expressly  stated  by  the  Evangelist.  But 
what  we  suppose,  follows  from  what  he  has  re- 
lated, when  we  view  his  history  in  connection 
with  our  knowledge  derived  from  other  sources. 
It  is  of  this  remarkable,  unobtruded,  apparently 
unstudied  consistency,  that  he  who  denies  the 
truth  of  the  history  is  called  upon  to  furnish  some 
other  solution.* 


*  [For  further  illustration  of  the  passages  remarked  upon  in  this 
chapter,  see  the  author's  Notes  on  the  Gospels.] 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  219 


CHAPTER    II. 

OBJECTIONS  AGAINST  THE  CONSISTENCY  OF  THE  NAKEATIVE 
CONSIDERED. 

WE  have  been  endeavoring  to  prove  the  truth 
of  the  Gospel  history  from  the  consistency  of  its 
different  parts  with  each  other,  with  the  whole, 
and  with  all  our  knowledge  bearing  upon  the 
subject  in  numberless  dependences  and  relations. 
This  consistency,  when  viewed  in  connection  with 
the  inartificial  style  of  narration,  gives  the  his- 
tory an  air  of  truth  which  human  skill  and  ge- 
nius seem  scarcely  more  capable  of  counterfeiting, 
than  they  are  of  counterfeiting  one  of  the  liv- 
ing productions  of  nature.  But  it  may  be  said 
that  there  is  an  important  point  in  which  the 
argument  fails,  and  may  be  turned  against  us.  It 
may  be  urged  that  the  effect  produced  by  the 
ministry  of  Christ  upon  the  great  body  of  the 
Jewish  nation  was  wholly  inconsistent  with  what 
we  might  reasonably  expect,  supposing  his  history 
to  be  true.  Though  performing  the  most  astonish- 


220        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ing  miracles  in  attestation  of  his  divine  authority, 
he  was  unable  to  subdue  the  incredulity  of  his 
countrymen.  -  It  is  impossible,  it  may  be  said,  that 
men's  minds  should  not  have  yielded  to  such 
proofs  as  he  is  related  to  have  given. 

Certainly,  if  the  Gospel  history  be  true,  Jesus 
Christ  did  give  the  most  unquestionable  proofs  of 
his  divine  mission.  But  it  is  an  error  to  suppose 
that  men  will  always  believe  and  act  as  it  is  in 
the  highest  degree  reasonable  that  they  should 
believe  and  act.  Our  passions  and  prejudices 
have  power  to  trample  the  strongest  evidence  un- 
der foot.  The  Pharisees  and  the  common  people 
whose  leaders  they  were,  refused  to  acknowledge 
the  divine  authority  of  our  Saviour.  One,  at  first 
thought,  may  be  ready  to  say  that  nothing  can  be 
imagined  more  unreasonable.  Yet  no  form  which 
their  opinions  concerning  Christ  might  assume, 
could  involve  so  gross  an  absurdity  as  the  doc- 
trine of  transubstantiation.  In  whatever  they 
might  believe,  there  was,  to  say  the  least,  no 
greater  dereliction  of  reason,  than  in  the  belief 
of  this  article  of  faith.  They  persecuted  Christ 
and  his  followers  in  defence  of  their  opinions ;  — 
but  those  who  have  held  that  doctrine  have  perse- 
cuted as  madly  in  its  support.  They  may  appear  to 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE   GOSPELS.  221 

have  rushed  upon  destruction,  struggling  against 
evidence  which  should  have  produced  conviction. 
It  is  an  awful  and  revolting  phenomenon.  But  it 
is  one  which  has  been  exhibited  since  their  times. 
The  voice  of  reason  and  religion  and  conscience 
has  been  often  distinctly  uttered  to  men  with- 
out being  heard  and  obeyed.  The  truth  is,  that 
when  we  suppose  an  extraordinary  difficulty  in 
the  case  of  the  unbelieving  Jews,  we  regard  noth- 
ing but  the  abstract  force  of  the  evidence  for  the 
divinity  of  our  Saviour's  mission,  supposing  it  to 
be  such  as  is  represented  in  the  Gospels.  We 
do  not  consider  those  circumstances  which  may 
have  produced  in  their  minds  a  very  false  esti- 
mate of  the  weight  of  this  evidence;  nor  take,  in  to 
view  the  strength  of  those  prejudices,  passions, 
and  vices,  that  whole  constitution  of  character,  by 
which  it  was  resisted. 

If  it  be  proved  that  Christ  performed  real  mira- 
cles, no  reasonable  man,  at  the  present  day,  will 
doubt  that  he  was  a  messenger  from  God.  But 
in  the  time  of  Christ,  this  conclusion  did  not 
necessarily  follow  in  the  mind  of  a  Jew.  That 
the  power  of  performing  miracles,  that  is,  of  pro- 
ducing effects  which  cannot  be  referred  to  the 
laws  of  nature,  must  in  all  cases,  when  viewed 

19* 


222  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

alone,  be  sufficient  evidence  that  he  in  whom  it 
resides  has  received  some  commission  from  God,  is 
a  proposition  which,  perhaps,  admits  of  satisfactory 
proof.  This  proof,  however,  is  derived  from  va- 
rious and  complex  considerations ;  and  the  truth 
of  the  proposition,  whether  in  this  abstract  form  it 
may  be  established  or  not,  was  certainly  not  gen- 
erally admitted  by  the  Jews  contemporary  with 
Christ.  They  were  an  ignorant  and  superstitious 
people.  The  prevalent  belief  in  the  reality  of  false 
miracles  existed  among  them  equally  as  among  the 
Heathens.  Some  narratives  in  their  Scriptures 
might  easily  be  understood  as  proving  the  doc- 
trine, that  the  power  of  performing  miracles  was 
not  confined  to  the  messengers  of  God,  or  to  those 
on  whom  he  looked  'with  favor.  They  believed  in 
the  agency  of  evil  spirits  as  interfering  with  the 
course  of  nature  and  inflicting  diseases  of  body 
and  mind.  There  were  persons  among  them  who 
were  regarded  as  able  to  cure  such  diseases  by 
casting  out  daemons.  They  believed  in  magic,  and 
consequently  had  no  doubt  that  miracles  might 
be  effected  through  means  and  agents  condemned 
by  God,  and  which  exposed  those  who  employed 
them  to  his  displeasure.  But,  holding  such  false 
opinions,  they  were  fully  prepared  to  resist  the 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       223 

conviction  which  the  miracles  of  our  Saviour  must 
have  produced  in  men  more  intelligent  and  better 
informed.  They  were  familiar  with  the  imagina- 
tion and  belief  of  false  miracles,  and  were  therefore 
less  likely  to  be  affected  by  real  miracles.  Believ- 
ing such  effects  to  be  often  produced  without  the 
interposition  of  God,  by  bad  agents,  they  were  fur- 
nished with  what  they  deemed  a  sufficient  account 
of  the  miracles  of  Christ,  though  his  divine  au- 
thority were  denied.  His  enemies  held  the  same 
opinion  concerning  them,  which  many  Christians 
have  held  respecting  the  pretended  miracles  of 
Paganism.  They  regarded  them  as  performed 
through  the  assistance  of  evil  spirits.  In  addition 
to  what  has  been  said,  it  may  be  well  to  recollect, 
though  it  is  not  a  consideration  of  primary  im- 
portance, that  the  principal  scene  of  Christ's  min- 
istry was  in  Galilee  and  the  neighboring  country, 
and  that  it  was  here  that  most  of  his  miracles 
were  performed;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
stronghold  of  his  enemies  was  at  Jerusalem, 
where  his  character,  preaching,  and  actions  were 
less  known. 

But  the  majority  of  the  Jews  were  not  likely 
to  be  deterred  from  their  opinion  respecting  the 
miraculous  powers  of  Christ,  either  by  the  holi- 


224  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF   THE 

ness  of  his  character,  or  by  the  conformity  of  his 
doctrines  and  precepts  to  our  highest  conceptions 
of  God.  In  .order  to  perceive  and  feel  the  display 
of  divine  excellence  which  was  manifested  in  his 
life  and  religion,  no  inconsiderable  degree  of  purity 
and  elevation  of  mind  is  required.  Moral  corrup- 
tion must  shrink  from  it  with  aversion  and  pain. 
Instead,  therefore,  of  commanding  the  respect  of 
his  countrymen,  it  was  one  cause  of  their  offence 
with  him  and  their  hatred  against  him.  But  there 
were  other  powerful  causes  in  operation. 

The  Jews  were  oppressed  by  the  Roman  power, 
and  despised  and  exasperated  by  their  oppressors. 
Insulated  among  nations,  not  less  by  mutual  feel- 
ings of  hostility  than  by  other  causes,  they  gloried 
in  their  peculiar  relation  to  God.  They  were  his 
people,  and  the  rest  of  men  were  their  enemies 
and  his  enemies.  Their  pride  was  their  consola- 
tion and  their  hope;  and  the  more  they  were 
humbled,  the  more  obstinate  and  deep-rooted  it 
became.  It  drew  strength  from  all  their  national 
and  all  their  religious  sentiments.  The  hour  was 
coming,  as  they  thought,  when  God  would  inter- 
pose for  his  chosen  people,  and  destroy  their 
oppressors.  The  times  of  the  Messiah  would  be 
a  period  of  deliverance  and  vengeance  and  glory. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  225 

This  expectation  was  an  article  of  religious  faith, 
and  the  cherished  object  of  their  strongest  pas- 
sions. But  when  Christ  appeared,  it  was  to  pros- 
trate those  hopes,  and  humble  that  pride  which 
oppression  and  suffering  had  only  confirmed.  No 
distinguishing  favor  of  God  to  the  Jewish  people 
was  manifested  through  him.  He  came  to  teach 
them,  that  they  were  not,  as  they  believed,  a  holy 
people,  but  sinners  and  aliens  from  God ;  and  that 
it  was  only  by  a  renovation  of  character  that  they 
could  obtain  his  favor.  He  came,  not  to  exalt 
them  in  triumph  over  their  enemies,  but  to  place 
the  rest  of  men  on  an  equality  with  them,  to  do 
away  the  distinctions  in  which  they  had  gloried, 
and  to  make  known  the  impartial  goodness  of 
God.  He  came,  not  to  gratify  their  passions,  but 
to  require  them  to  relinquish  those  passions.  No 
shock  or  discouragement,  however,  could  at  once 
subdue  those  strong  hopes  which  his  appearance 
had  called  forth.  Though  unsatisfied,  there  were 
still  some  of  their  number  who  were  ready,  with,  or 
even  without,  his  consent,  "  to  make  him  king." 
But  he  repelled  from  him  those  who  came  with 
such  feelings.  He  turned  into  hostility  the  pas- 
sions which  he  refused  to  gratify.  At  the  same 
time,  the  place  of  his  birth,  the  condition  of  his 


226       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

family,  his  mode  of  life,  the  character  of  his  few 
followers,  the  hopes  which  he  held  out  to  them, 
were  all  foreign  from  what  they  had  expected  in 
their  great  Deliverer.  Was  it  strange,  then,  that 
they  refused  to  acknowledge  him  as  the  Messiah, 
who  corresponded  to  none  of  their  conceptions  of 
the  Messiah,  and  who,  instead  of  accomplishing, 
had  come  to  destroy,  the  hopes  of  his  nation  1 

But  this  was  not  all.  Jesus  Christ  was,  in  the 
highest  sense  of  the  words,  a  moral  and  religious 
reformer,  the  most  open  and  uncompromising,  ex- 
posed to  all  the  hatred  which  may  ever  attach  to 
this  character.  The  Jewish  religion  had  become 
grossly  corrupt.  It  was,  as  other  forms  of  super- 
stition have  been,  little  more  than  a  religion  of 
substitutions  for  holiness  and  virtue ;  not  leading 
men  to  goodness,  but  furnishing  them  with  some 
other  imaginary  means  of  obtaining  the  favor  of 
God.  Now  when,  in  any  case,  a  reformer  exhibits 
the  true  character  of  such  substitutions,  and  pre- 
sents to  view  the  real  requirements  of  religion,  the 
natural  effect  will  be,  that  those  who  have  founded 
their  pride  upon  the  former  will  regard  him  as 
profanely  endeavoring  to  destroy  men's  reverence 
for  what  is  sabred.  He  will  be  viewed  by  them 
as  an  enemy  to  religion ;  for  he  is  an  enemy  to 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  227 

what  they  have  thought  religion.  They  will  re- 
gard him  with  deep-felt  hostility ;  for  he  is  destroy- 
ing the  support  of  their  self-satisfaction,  and  of 
their  estimation  among  men.  Their  worst  pas- 
sions will  be  arrayed  by  their  bigotry  in  the  dis- 
guise of  religious  zeal.  This  was  eminently  true 
as  regards  the  Jews.  With  what  feelings  must 
the  Pharisees  have  heard  a  teacher,  who,  assum- 
ing the  most  decisive  tone  of  authority,  announced 
to  them  that  they  were  hypocrites  and  sinners, 
deceiving  themselves  and  their  followers  ?  How 
must  they  have  listened  to  one  who  called  upon 
them  to  acquire  that  holiness  which  they  had  no 
doubt  of  already  possessing,  through  the  hard  way 
of  humility,  repentance,  and  entire  change  of  char- 
acter 1  How  many  of  them  could  be  expected  to 
become  the  disciples  of  such  a  teacher1?  And 
what  must  have  been  the  bitterness  and  exaspera- 
tion of  those  who  did  not !  In  what  state  of  mind 
were  they  to  estimate  fairly  the  evidence  of  his 
divine  mission  ]  Their  strongest  passions  were  ex- 
asperated ;  their  most  deep-rooted  prejudices  were 
assailed ;  and  the  whole  force  of  these  was  turned 
against  him.  Even  their  wavering  apprehensions, 
if  any  such  were  felt,  that  his  claims  might  be  well- 
founded,  only  served  to  increase  their  alarm  and 


228        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

agitation,  and,  consequently,  to  give  new  strength 
to  the  feelings  which  they  had  not  power  to  sub- 
due. The  s,tate  of  mind  which  existed  in  the 
Pharisees  must  have  been  common  in  some  de- 
gree to  most  of  the  Jews.  The  system  of  doc- 
trines and  duties  taught  by  Christ  was  at  variance 
with  the  inveterate  errors  of  his  countrymen.  The 
alternative  was,  whether,  becoming  as  children, 
they  should  surrender  these  errors,  having  im- 
plicit faith  in  Christ  as  teaching  by  the  authority 
of  God ;  or  whether  they  should  cling  to  and  de- 
fend them,  regarding  him  as  an  impious  innova- 
tor. The  latter  was  the  character  which  many  of 
the  Jews  ascribed  to  Christ.  The  fact  is  evident 
from  his  own  discourses.  It  accounts  for  the  fre- 
quency and  force  with  which  he  insisted  on  his 
connection  with  God  as  His  messenger  and  repre- 
sentative ;  and  for  the  variety  of  forms  in  which 
he  presented  this  truth.  It  is  clear  that  his  ene- 
mies were  under  such  a  strong  delusion,  as  to 
imagine  themselves  defending  against  him  the 
cause  of  God  and  of  God's  people.  Their  feel- 
ings of  hostility  broke  out  repeatedly  with  partic- 
ular violence,  when,  by  an  intentional  disregard  of 
those  ceremonies  which  they  thought  of  high  im- 
portance, particularly  a  superstitious  observance 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       229 

of  the  Sabbath,  he  showed  of  how  little  account 
he  esteemed  them.  An  enemy  of  their  faith,  a 
despiser  of  their  traditions,  one  who  made  no  ac- 
count of  that  scrupulousness  of  conscience  which 
paid  tithes  even  of  mint  and  cumin,  but  who 
denounced  as  hypocrites  those  holy  men  whose 
authority  had  been  most  respected;  a  teacher 
who  taught  not  as  those  who  had  made  the  Law 
their  study ;  a  contemner  of  religious  ceremonies ; 
a  breaker  of  the  Sabbath;  a  companion  of  tax- 
gatherers  and  sinners ;  a  pretended  Messiah  who 
came  not  to  deliver  God's  chosen  people,  but  as 
a  prophet  of  evil,  denouncing  the  destruction  even 
of  Jerusalem  and  the  temple,  —  it  was  thus  that  a 
bigoted  Jew  must  have  regarded  Christ ;  and  what 
strength  of  evidence  could  prove  to  him  that  such 
a  one  was  a  messenger  from  God  1  "  He  casts  out 
the  daemons  through  the  prince  of  the  daemons." 
This  was  not  a  mere  timid  solution  of  the  difficulty 
which  his  miracles  presented;  it  was  the  strong 
expression  of  the  feelings  which  possessed  those 
by  whom  it  was  uttered. 

It  is  a  gross  error  to  suppose  that  miracles  are 
particularly  adapted  to  aifect  the  minds  of  a  rude 
and  superstitious  people.  They  will  produce  their 

most  powerful  impression  upon  the  most  enlight- 
20 


230        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ened, — upon  those  who  have  the  most  correct  con- 
ceptions of  the  power  and  character  of  God,  the 
most  extensive  acquaintance  with  the  causes  of 
natural  phenomena,  who  are  most  free  from  cre- 
dulity, and  who,  in  consequence,  are  not  familiar- 
ized to  the  imagination  and  belief  of  false  miracles. 
To  such,  a  real  miracle  must  be  an  astonishing 
and  almost  appalling  event,  commanding  attention, 
and  affording  ground  for  the  strongest  conviction. 
By  the  ignorant  and  superstitious  it  may  be  re- 
garded as  merely  belonging  to  a  class  of  phenom- 
ena of  not  very  unfrequent  occurrence. 

WHEN,  therefore,  we  attend  to  the  character, 
opinions,  and  state  of  mind  of  those  whom  Christ 
addressed,  we  perceive  that  the  result  of  his  min- 
istry was  such  as  we  might  reasonably  expect  to 
find  it.  I  do  not  urge  this  coincidence  as  any 
evidence  of  the  truth  of  his  history ;  for,  whether 
the  rest  of  the  history  be  true  or  false,  there  could 
be  but  one  statement  respecting  a  fact,  in  its  na- 
ture so  notorious.  My  purpose  has  hitherto  been 
merely  to  remove  an  objection. 

BUT  the  statements  which  have  been  made  for 
this  purpose  may  be  viewed  under  a  different  as- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  231 

pect.  There  is,  running  through  the  Gospels,  a 
striking  correspondence  with  the  representations 
which  have  been  given.  It  is  nowhere  implied 
in  these  books,  that  any  doubt  was  entertained  of 
the  reality  of  Christ's  miracles.  There  is  not  a  sin- 
gle expression  which  betrays  any  apprehension  or 
thought  of  their  truth  being  denied.  There  is  no 
attempt  to  establish  it  by  arguments,  by  the  refu- 
tation of  objections,  or  by  any  detail  of  circum- 
stances having  a  bearing  upon  this  point.  The 
facts  are  told  nakedly,  as  equally  indisputable  and 
undisputed.  But  this  is  not  all.  There  are  re- 
peated implications,  apparently  indirect  and  un- 
studied, that  the  reality  of  Christ's  miracles  was 
universally  acknowledged,  equally  by  those  who 
did  not  recognize  them  as  evidences  of  his  divine 
mission  and  by  those  who  did.  There  are,  at  the 
same  time,  repeated  exhibitions  of  the  workings 
of  those  passions  and  prejudices  which  have  been 
supposed.  Such,  for  instance,  is  the  case  in  the 
account  which  the  Pharisees  are  represented  to 
have  given  of  the  manner  in  which  Christ's  mir- 
acles were  performed,  taken  in  connection  with 
the  subsequent  remarks  of  Christ  upon  what  they 
said.*  The  whole  narrative  implies  that  there  was 

*  Compare  Matthew  ix.  34 ;  xii.  24,  seqq. 


232       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

no  controversy  about  the  facts  themselves.  That 
the  words  ascribed  to  the  Pharisees  were  not 
falsely  ascribed  to  them  is  further  confirmed,  it 
may  be  observed,  by  an  incidental  allusion  to  them, 
made  by  Christ :  "  If  they  have  called  the  master 
of  the  house  Beelzebub,  how  much  more  will  they 
so  call  those  of  his  household ! "  *  A  like  indirect 
acknowledgment  of  the  reality  of  his  miracles,  and 
the  operation  of  a  like  state  of  mind,  appear  in 
what  was  said  by  his  fellow-townsmen  of  Nazareth 
while  refusing  to  acknowledge  his  divine  authori- 
ty :  "  Whence  has  this  man  such  wisdom,  and  these 
mighty  powers  1  Is  he  not  the  son  of  the  carpen- 
ter V'  t  Similar  remarks  may  be  made  respecting 
the  request  of  the  Pharisees  that  he  would  give 
"a  sign  FROM  HEAVEN."  They  would  not  have 
asked  a-  sign  from  heaven  of  one  whom  they  re- 
garded as  a  mere  impostor,  not  possessed  of  any 
extraordinary  powers.  If  they  could  have  exposed 
any  deception  in  his  miracles  performed  on  earth, 
they  would  not  have  sought  to  put  him  to  a  new 
trial.  The  implication  is  that  these  miracles  were 
unsatisfactory ;  and  that  it  was  necessary  for  him 
to  give  some  more  decisive  proof  of  his  divine 
mission,  by  a  sign  coming  evidently  from  Him 

*  Matthew  x.  25.  |  Matthew  xiii.  54,  55. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  233 

whom  they  conceived  of  as  dwelling  in  the  heav- 
ens. I  give  these  passages  merely  as  examples. 
A  similar  character  appears  more  or  less  distinctly 
in  many  others.* 

The  remark  that  the  miracles  of  Christ  appear 
from  the  Gospels  to  have  been  unquestioned,  is 
true  of  what  may  be  more  strictly  called  his  mira- 
cles. But  it  is  not  true  of  the  fact  of  his  resur- 
rection. Respecting  this,  St.  Matthew  relates  that 
there  was  a  story  in  circulation  that  his  disciples 
came  by  night  and  stole  his  body  away  while  the 
guards  slept.t  The  effect  of  this  single  exception 
is  to  confirm  the  argument  derived  from  the  gen- 
eral characteristic  of  the  Gospels  before  mentioned. 
Here  we  are  told  by  the  Evangelist,  that  the  most 
important  miracle  which  he  records  was  treated 
as  an  imposture.  We  may  fairly  conclude,  there- 
fore, that  with  the  same  honesty,  or  the  same 
indifference,  or  the  same  incapacity  for  deception, 
he  would,  in  some  way,  have  given  us  information 
of  the  fact,  if  the  truth  of  the  other  miracles  re- 
corded by  him  had  been  called  in  question.  What 
he  here  expressly  states  confirms  most  strongly  the 

*  Some  of  these  are  mentioned  by  Paley.  (Evidences,  Part  UL 
ch.  iv.) 

f  Matthew  xxviii.  1 2,  seqq. 
20* 


234        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

correctness  of  those  accounts  which  imply  that  their 
truth  was  not  disputed.  But  in  what  manner  does 
he  mention  this  particular  story  of  the  unbeliev- 
ing Jews "?  He  merely  states  it,  without  any  at- 
tempt at  refutation,  without  even  a  formal  denial 
of  it,  without  a  single  remark  respecting  it.  He 
could  not  have  treated  it  with  more  indifference, 
or  with  more  appearance  of  regarding  it  as  des- 
titute equally  of  plausibility  and  of  truth,  and 
wholly  unlikely  to  obtain  credit.  If  the  story 
had  been  urged  with  any  confidence,  if  it  had 
been  in  fact  believed  by  those  who  brought  it  for- 
ward, it  could  hardly  have  been  passed  over  with 
such  slight. 

It  appears  then,  that,  with  the  exception  just 
mentioned,  the  writers  of  the  Gospels  nowhere 
imply  that  any  doubt  was  professed  or  entertained 
of  the  reality  of  the  miracles  which  they  relate ; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  enemies  of  Christ 
admitted  the  fact  of  his  supernatural  powers. 
Now  this  is  a  remarkable  characteristic  of  these 
histories,  which  corresponds  to  the  supposition  of 
their  truth,  but  does  not  correspond  to  any  other 
supposition  that  can  be  made.  If  we  suppose 
the  histories  to  be  false,  and  that  Christ  did  not 
perform  miracles,  there  are  but  three  suppositions 


GENUINENESS   OF   THE   GOSPELS.  235 

of  which  the  case  admits :  one,  That  he  falsely  pre- 
tended to  have  this  power ;  another,  That  though 
he  himself  did  not  pretend  to  this  power,  yet  his 
disciples  believed  him  to  possess  it,  and  to  have, 
in  fact,  performed  many  miracles ;  and  the  third, 
That  though  Christ  neither  pretended  to  this 
power,  nor  was  believed  by  his  disciples  to  pos- 
sess it,  yet  miracles  were  falsely  attributed  to  him 
after  his  death.  The  second  supposition  may  ap- 
pear too  improbable  to  be  stated;  nor  should  I 
have  thought  of  bringing  it  forward,  if  it  had  not 
actually  been  maintained.  We  may  say,  gener- 
ally, that  the  pretence  that  Christ  performed  mir- 
acles was  either  made  during  his  lifetime  by 
himself  or  by  his  disciples;  or,  not  being  then 
urged,  was  brought  forward  after  his  death.  In 
either  case,  if  it  had  admitted  of  dispute  or  denial, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  would  have  been 
disputed  and  denied.  If  there  had  been  room 
even  for  any  cavil  or  objection,  it  would  have 
been  made.  If  his  miracles  had  been  false,  the 
personal  enemies  of  Christ,  or,  subsequently  to  his 
time,  the  enemies  of  the  rising  sect,  would  have 
seized  at  once  upon  this  decisive  ground  of  attack. 
It  would  have  been  the  universal  objection  of  the 
opposers  of  Christianity.  It  is  unnecessary  to  my 


236  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

present  purpose  to  observe,  that  the  objection  must 
have  been  triumphant,  and  that  it  is  impossible 
that  such  a  ,  series  of  bold  and  gross  fictions  as 
would  have  existed  in  the  Gospels  could  have 
stood  their  ground,  at  once  against  the  truth  and 
against  violent  opposition.  I  only  say,  that  these 
relations  would  have  been  met  on  every  side  with 
doubts,  and  strong  controversy,  and  positive  denial. 
The  opposers  of  Christianity  did  not  think  them- 
selves destitute  of  arguments  against  it ;  and  they 
urged  them  strenuously  and  confidently.  What 
they  were,  we  learn  not  merely  from  the  Gospels, 
but  equally  from  the  Epistles  and  from  other 
sources.  The  first  preachers  of  our  religion  were 
continually  called  upon  to  meet  and  answer  them. 
There  is,  however,  no  indication  that  the  reality 
of  the  miracles  was  disputed.  But  if  this  could 
have  been  denied,  here  would  have  been  the  tug 
and  strain  of  the  controversy.  Upon  his  miracles 
the  Founder  of  our  religion  is  represented  as  hav- 
ing rested  his  claims :  "  If  I  had  not  done  among 
them  such  works  as  no  other  ever  did,  they  would 
not  be  thus  guilty."  The  first  and  the  last  objec- 
tion to  his  claims,  therefore,  would  have  been,  that 
such  works  were  not  performed  by  him.  But  if  a 
controversy  of  the  kind  we  have  supposed  had 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       237 

really  existed,  we  should  have  found,  I  do  not  say 
traces,  but  abundant  and  decisive  proofs  of  it  in 
the  Gospels,  as  well  as  in  other  writings  of  early 
Christians.  It  would  have  been  impossible  that 
such  a  series  of  extraordinary  narratives,  relating 
to  a  subject  of  such  deep  interest,  should  have 
been  presented  naked  to  the  attacks  of  unbelievers 
and  enemies,  without  an  attempt  to  support  their 
authority,  or  to  invalidate  the  statements  of  those 
who  denied  their  truth,  and  even  without  any  ref- 
erence to  those  opposite  accounts  which  must  have 
been  notorious  to  all  who  cared  about  the  facts 
in  question.  The  writers  of  these  histories  were 
treading  upon  ground  where  they  were  exposed 
to  continual  attack,  and  must  have  been  constantly 
in  armor.  On  the  contrary,  they  proceed  with 
the  most  unaffected  air  of  security.  Not  only 
are  there  no  traces  in  their  books  of  any  contro- 
versy respecting  the  reality  of  Christ's  miracles, 
but  there  runs  throughout  these  writings  an  im- 
plication that  no  doubt  of  their  reality  was  en- 
tertained. Now  this  could  not  be  consummate 
artifice,  though  it  might  tend  to  deceive  readers 
at  the  distance  of  eighteen  centuries ;  but  it  must 
have  been  consummate  folly,  for  it  could  deceive 
no  readers  at  the  time  when  the  books  appeared. 


238  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

It  is  a  folly,  however,  of  which  no  writers  placed 
in  such  circumstances  as  were  the  Evangelists  can 
be  supposed  •  guilty.  The  characteristic  of  which 
we  have  been  speaking  implies,  therefore,  the  truth 
of  their  history ;  and  it  admits  of  explanation  on 
no  other  hypothesis.  It  is  a  mark  of  authenticity 
which  cannot  be  artificial,  but  which  runs,  like 
the  natural  veins  of  an  agate,  through  the  very 
structure  of  their  writings. 

The  argument  may  be  thus  simply  stated.  If 
the  reality  of  Christ's  miracles  could  have  been 
controverted,  this  would  have  been  the  main  con- 
troversy between  Christians  and  their  opponents. 
If  such  a  controversy  had  existed,  we  should  have 
found  proofs  of  it  in  the  writings  of  the  early 
Christians,  and  especially  in  the  Gospels.  But  no 
such  proofs  are  to  be  found;  on  the  contrary,  we 
perceive  decisive  implications  that  the  reality  of 
his  miracles  was  not  denied.  It  follows,  that  no 
such  controversy  existed.  The  reality  of  his  mira- 
cles was  not,  because  it  could  not  be,  denied ;  and 
the  narrative  of  them  is  therefore  true. 

THE  history  contained  in  the  Gospels  may  be 
divided  into  two  parts :  one,  containing  narratives 
of  miraculous  events ;  and  the  other,  accounts  of 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       239 

the  discourses  of  our  Saviour,  of  his  actions  not 
miraculous,  and  of  the  dispositions,  words,  and 
actions  of  others,  —  his  friends,  his  enemies,  and 
the  common  multitude.  Now  between  these  two 
portions  into  which  the  history  may  be  divided, 
there  is  a  perfect  correspondence.  That  our  Sav- 
iour was  a  divine  messenger  endued  with  miracu- 
lous powers  is  brought  into  view  with  almost  as 
much  distinctness  in  one  portion  of  the  narrative 
as  in  the  other.  This  fact  appears  in  his  always 
demanding  to  be  believed  and  obeyed  simply  upon 
his  own  authority,  as  speaking  in  the  name  of 
God;  in  his  appeals  to  his  miracles  as  the  proof 
on  which  his  claims  rested;  in  his  forcibly  pre- 
senting to  the  minds  of  his  disciples  the  suffer- 
ings to  be  endured  by  them  in  this  life,  and  giving 
nothing  but  his  own  promise  for  the  rewards  to 
be  expected  by  them  after  death;  in  the  distant 
and  submissive  respect  with  which  they  regarded 
him;  in  the  very  extraordinary  effects  produced 
by  his  ministry ;  in  the  strong  disposition  of  the 
Jews  to  believe  him  to  be  their  Messiah,  notwith- 
standing the  opposition  between  his  life  and  ac- 
tions and  their  previous  conceptions ;  in  the  other 
opinions  entertained  concerning  him,  "  some  say- 
ing that  he  was  John  the  Baptist ;  others,  Elijah ; 


240  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

and  others,  Jeremiah,  or  one  of  the  Prophets  " ;  in 
the  multitudes  that  attended  him,  amounting  at  one 
time,  and  that  in  a  desert  place,  to  five  thousand 
men,  besides  women  and  children,  —  an  assembly 
of  Galileean  Jews,  which  could  not  have  been  drawn 
together  to  hear  a  mere  philosopher  expounding  a 
refined  system  of  religion  and  morals;  in  those 
indirect  acknowledgments  of  the  truth  of  his  mir- 
acles to  which  we  have  just  adverted;  and,  gen- 
erally, in  the  correspondence  of  his  whole  charac- 
ter, and  of  all  his  actions,  doctrines,  and  precepts, 
to  the  conception  of  a  supernatural  messenger  from 
God,  —  a  subject  to  be  explained  more  fully  here- 
after. Nor  is  this  all ;  the  fact  of  his  being  en- 
dued with  miraculous  powers  is  clearly  implied  in 
various  particular  passages  of  the  Gospels,  not  to 
be  referred  to  any  of  the  heads  just  mentioned. 
Allowing  the  truth  of  this  fact,  the  whole  history 
is  consistent  and  probable.  But  if  the  accounts  of 
Christ's  miracles  be  false,  then  the  remainder  of 
the  history  must,  generally  speaking,  be  false  also. 
It  consists  of  narratives  of  actions  and  discourses, 
which,  upon  this  supposition,  become  absurd,  im- 
probable, or  necessarily  untrue.  It  cannot,  there- 
fore, be  said  that  the  accounts  of  the  miracles  are 
false,  but  that  the  rest  of  the  history  is  true. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       241 

There  is  such  a  consistency  and  intimate  corre- 
spondence between  the  different  portions  of  the 
narrative,  that  the  whole,  generally  speaking,  must 
be  false,  or  the  whole  must  be  true. 

No  reasonable  man,  however,  will  contend  that 
the  history  is  merely  fictitious,  that  there  was  no 
groundwork  of  facts  for  the  narrative  in  the  Gos- 
pels, and  that  no  such  person  as  Christ  existed. 
What  seems  to  be  regarded  as  the  most  plausible 
supposition,  by  those  who  deny  the  truth  of  the 
Gospel  history,  is  this:  That  a  very  enlightened 
philosopher  made  his  appearance  in  Galilee,  whose 
purpose  was  to  reform  the  religion  and  morals  of 
the  Jews,  and  perhaps  of  the  rest  of  the  world; 
but  that  his  character  and  claims  have  been  ex- 
travagantly misrepresented,  and  that  the  narrative 
of  his  life  has  been  interpolated  with  strange  fa- 
bles. But  to  this  or  any  other  supposition  which 
denies  the  truth  of  the  miracles,  the  consistency 
of  the  history  presents  a  conclusive  objection.  If 
the  general  representation  given  by  the  Evange- 
lists of  the  character,  office,  and  miracles  of  Christ 
had  been  false,  it  would  have  been  impossible  for 
such  writers  as  they  were  to  imagine  a  probable 
story  of  a  series  of  events  such  as  must  have  fol- 
lowed upon  the  supposition  of  its  truth ;  a  story 
21 


242  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

consistent  not  merely  with  itself,  but  with  all  that 
we  can  learn  respecting  the  history  and  circum- 
stances of  the  times  to  which  it  refers.  If  their 
narratives  had  not  been  true,  they  must  have 
presented  a  very  different  aspect  from  what  they 
now  bear,  They  would  have  been  full  of  incon- 
gruities, inconsistencies  in  the  representation  of 
character,  and  latent  and  obvious  contradictions 
both  of  known  facts  and  of  statements  contained 
in  the  narratives  themselves. 

According  to  the  supposition  which  we  are  con- 
sidering, Jesus  Christ  was  not  the  Jewish  Messiah, 
nor  did  he  claim  to  be;  he  was  not  a  messenger 
from  God,  in  any  proper  sense  of  those  words,  nor 
did  he  assume  that  character;  he  had  not  the 
power  of  performing  miracles,  nor  did  he  pretend 
to  this  power.  Yet  we  have  a  consistent  story, 
corresponding  to  a  directly  opposite  conception  of 
his  character.  This  story,  then,  must  be  a  work 
of  invention,  a  product  of  human  art  and  genius. 
But  there  could  not  well  have  been  a  more  diffi- 
cult subject  for  invention.  Allowing  it,  however, 
to  be  one  capable  of  execution,  it  is  clear  that 
neither  of  the  four  Evangelists  possessed  the  in- 
tellectual powers  and  habits  necessary  for  this 
extraordinary  task.  A  groundwork  of  real  facts, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       243 

instead  of  assisting  them  in  their  fiction,  would 
only  have  embarrassed  the  subject,  and  rendered 
it  more  difficult  and  unmanageable.  These  facts 
would  have  been  continually  forcing  themselves 
into  notice,  and  obstructing  the.  free  exercise  of 
invention.  There  would  have  been  evident  at 
first  sight  a  strange  mixture  of  heterogeneous  ma- 
terials in  their  narrative.  We  may  say,  therefore, 
that,  supposing  the  Evangelists  to  have  set  out 
with  the  original  conception  of  a  divine  messen- 
ger endued  with  miraculous  powers,  and  placed  in 
such  circumstances  as  those  in  which  Christ  is  rep- 
resented to  have  been,  it  must  have  been  a  work  of 
most  extraordinary  genius  to  imagine  a  thoroughly 
consistent  and  probable  account  of  his  ministry ; 
and  the  necessity  of  conforming  this  account  to  a 
series  of  real  facts,  and  of  distorting  natural  events 
with  their  consequences  into  supernatural  events 
with  their  appropriate  consequences,  would  only 
have  aggravated  the  difficulty.  But  such  a  con- 
sistent and  probable  story  we  do  possess  in  each  of 
the  Gospels ;  and  the  only  alternative  seems  to  be, 
that  it  is  either  true,  or  that  it  is,  what  no  one 

^ 

will  believe,  a  most  uncommon  production  of  skill 
and  genius  on  the  part  of  the  respective  authors 
of  these  works.  To  suppose  such  a  consistent 


244  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF   THE 

narrative  to  be  formed  by  collecting  traditions, 
fables,  and  exaggerated  stories,  invented  and  prop- 
agated by  many  individuals  deceiving  and  deceived, 
is  like  imagining  a  fine  historical  picture  to  be 
composed  by  putting  together  figures  and  designs, 
the  work  of  different  unskilful  artists,  each  follow- 
ing his  own  fancy. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  245 


CHAPTER    III. 

THE  CHARACTER  OF  CHRIST  AS  IT  APPEARS  IN  THE 
GOSPELS. 

SECTION  I. 
His  Teaching. 

THE  perfect  exhibition  of  moral  excellence  in 
the  teaching  and  actions  of  Christ  has  been  often 
urged  as  an  intrinsic  proof  of  the  divinity  of  his 
mission.  I  am  about  to  apply  this  consideration 
in  a  somewhat  different  manner,  and  to  use  it  as  a 
proof  of  the  genuineness  of  the  writings  in  which 
his  character  appears,  and  which  profess  to  afford 
a  record  of  what  he  taught. 

The  argument  is  this.  The  Gospels  contain  an 
exhibition  of  character,  real  or  imaginary,  incom- 
parably more  wonderful  than  is  to  be  found  in  any 
other  writings.  It  is  the  character  of  a  messenger 
from  God,  assuming  in  his  name  the  highest  au- 
thority, constantly  exercising  supernatural  powers, 

and   appearing  among  men  for  the  purpose  of 
21* 


246        INTEKNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

making  them  acquainted  with  God,  with  their 
own  immortal  nature,  with  their  duty,  and  with 
those  ennobling  and  awful  sanctions  by  which  it 
is  enforced.  He  is  represented  as  discovering  to 
men  a  perfect  system  of  religion.  He  always  ap- 
pears, whether  teaching,  or  acting,  or  suffering,  as 
displaying  the  highest  excellence.  His  character 
is  everywhere  consistent  with  itself  and  with  the 
supernatural  dignity  of  his  office,  though  he  is  rep- 
resented as  passing  through  scenes  the  most  try- 
ing and  humiliating.  We  have,  then,  in  these 
writings,  a  just  conception  of  a  perfect  system  of 
religion,  as  taught  by  a  divine  teacher,  assuming 
the  highest  authority  and  exercising  the  most  ex- 
traordinary powers,  and  displaying  throughout  a 
character  in  which  we  discover  nothing  but  what 
is  excellent  and  sublime. 

But  the  writers  of  the  Gospels  derived  those 
conceptions  which  we  find  in  their  works,  either 
from  reality,  or  from  their  own  imaginations.  If 
we  allow  the  former  part  of  .this  alternative,  the 
fact  that  the  writings  are  genuine  may,  as  we  shall 
see  hereafter,  be  rendered  in  the  highest  degree 
probable,  though,  at  the  same  time,  the  question 
of  their  genuineness  becomes  comparatively  unim- 
portant. But  if  it  be  contended  that  these  writers 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       247 

did  not  draw  from  reality,  but  from  imagination, — 
that  they  are  not  simple  historians,  but  that  their 
narratives  are  fiction, — the  answer  to  this  suppo- 
sition is,  that  the  conceptions  of  moral  excellence 
and  sublimity  which  we  find  displayed  and  em- 
bodied in  their  writings  would  imply  a  transcend- 
ent genius  and  force  of  mind,  to  which  there  is 
no  parallel,  which  it  is  impossible  should  have 
existed  in  four  anonymous,  unknown  authors,  and 
which  are  irreconcilable  with  the  actual  want  of 
extraordinary  talents,  and  of  skill  in  composition, 
that  is  discovered  in  their  works.  These  con- 
ceptions likewise  would  imply  a  correctness  of 
moral  principle,  and  a  purity  and  sublimity  of 
moral  feeling,  which  could  not  exist  in  union 
with  intentional  falsehood.  The  argument,  there- 
fore, is  briefly  this :  That  the  religion  and  morality 
of  the  Gospels,  as  exhibited  in  the  doctrines,  pre- 
cepts, and  life  of  Christ,  are  such  as  could  not  have 
been  conceived  and  represented  by  the  writers  of 
the  Gospels,  if  they  had  not  had  a  living  archetype 
before  them ;  and  that,  without  such  an  archetype, 
the  power  of  conceiving  and  representing  what 
we  find  in  the  Gospels,  if  it  ever  existed  in 
any  human  being,  would  necessarily  imply  that 
that  extraordinary  being  had  a  character  which 


248  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

entitled  him  to  perfect  confidence.  It  was  wholly 
out  of  the  power  of  the  writers  of  the  Gospels 
to  deceive  us  as  they  must  have  done,  suppos- 
ing their  representations  false ;  and  the  very  ex- 
istence of  such  a  power,  in  any  case,  would  in 
itself  imply  the  absence  of  all  will  to  deceive. 
The  intrinsic  character  of  these  writings,  there- 
fore, affords  positive  evidence  of  their  authenticity 
as  to  all  essential  facts,  and  consequently,  as  we 
shall  see,  strong  evidence  of  their  genuineness. 

LET  us  consider  more  particularly  what  we  find 
in  the  Gospels.  According  to  these  histories,  at  a 
period  when  what  we  now  regard  as  true  religion 
had  no  existence  upon  earth,  when  only  some  rude 
and  very  imperfect  notions  of  morality  found  their 
way  to  the  multitude,  and  when,  in  consequence, 
the  mass  of  men  were  extremely  debased,  ignorant, 
and  vicious,  there  appeared  a  teacher  who  took 
upon  himself  the  reformation  of  mankind.  He 
appeared  among  the  Jews,  a  nation  who  were  far 
from  sharing  in  the  common  intellectual  improve- 
ment of  their  heathen  neighbors ;  who  probably, 
with  some  exceptions,  were  as  depraved  as  the 
rest  of  the  world;  and  whose  religion,  originally 
derived  from  God,  had  become  full  of  error  and 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  249 

corruption.  He  was  a  young  man,  born  in  the 
lower  class  of  the  people,  and  brought  up  in  Gali- 
lee. I  mention  this  latter  circumstance,  because 
Galilee  had  a  sort  of  provincial  relation  to  Judaea ; 
and  the  proper  Jews  regarded  the  Galilseans  as 
inferior  to  themselves.  He  had  not  been  educated 
even  in  the  common  learning  of  his  nation.  Yet, 
amid  the  ignorance  and  depravity  with  which  he 
was  surrounded,  he  developed  a  system  of  religion 
and  morals  blended  together  and  exhibited  in  their 
proper  relations,  nothing  like  which  had  ever  been 
made  known  before,  and  which,  since  it  has  been 
made  known,  human  reason  has  been  wholly  un- 
able to  improve. 

WHAT,  then,  were  the  great  characteristics  of 
the  preaching  of  Christ,  the  fundamental  princi- 
ples which  were  continually  appearing  in  his  dis- 
courses ]  I  answer,  that  he  spoke  of  God,  of 
eternity,  and  of  our  relations  to  our  fellow- 
creatures. 

He  spoke  of  God.  His  countrymen  had  been 
accustomed  to  regard  the  Almighty  as  the  partial 
God  of  their  nation,  and  the  severe  judge  and 
enemy  of  the  rest  of  the  world.  Their  language 
was :  "  Among  all  the  multitudes  of  people,  thou, 


250        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

O  Lord,  hast  gotten  thee  one  people."  "  Thou 
madest  the  world  for  our  sakes.  As  for  the  other 
people  who  also  come  of  Adam,  thou  hast  said  that 
they  are  nothing."*  He  taught, that  "  God  had  so 
loved  THE  WORLD  as  to  give  his  only  Son,  that 
every  one"  (whether  Jew  or  Gentile)  "  believing  in 
him  should  not  perish,  but  have  eternal  life."  He 
presented  to  view  a  conception  of  God,  accommo- 
dated to  the  weakness  of  our  nature,  but  which 
may  exhaust  the  strength  of  the  human  intellect 
in  its  contemplation.  He  taught  his  hearers  to 
regard  Him  as  our  Father  in  heaven,  caring  for 
us  with  more  than  parental  care.  "  If  you,  then, 
though  evil,  give  your  children  what  is  good,  how 
much  more  will  your  Father  in  heaven  give  what 
is  good  to  those  who  ask  him ! "  He  spoke  of  that 
invisible  energy  of  God  which  is  ever  in  action, 
which  clothes  the  flowers  of  the  field  in  beauty,  and 
without  which  a  sparrow  falls  not  to  the  ground. 
He  taught  his  disciples  to  trust  in  Him  as  a  Being 
whose  providence  nothing  escapes,  by  whom  even 
the  hairs  of  their  heads  were  numbered.  In  his 
preaching,  our  intimate  relation  to  God  was  con- 
tinually recognized  and  insisted  upon.  He  repre- 

*  2Esdrasv.  27;  vi.  55,  56. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       251 

sented  Him  as  the  moral  governor  of  mankind,  with 
all  knowledge  and  all  power  to  effect  His  purposes. 
"  He  sees  what  is  done  in  secret,  and  will  reward 
openly."  His  will  must  be  the  rule  of  our  con- 
duct. "  Not  every  one  who  says  to  me,  Master, 
Master,  will  enter  the  kingdom  of  Heaven ;  but 
he  who  does  the  will  of  my  Father  in  heaven." 
We  are  familiar  with  these  words,  and  they  may 
not  at  first  affect  us  with  all  their  force.  But  let 
us  examine  them,  and  we  shall  find  that  we  can 
form  no  higher  and  juster  conception  of  the  man- 
ner in  which  a  messenger  from  God  to  men  ought 
to  express  himself.  They  enforce  in  the  strongest 
terms  the  necessity  of  moral  virtue  as  the  one  thing 
required  to  obtain  the  favor  of  God,  and  at  the 
same  time  convey  in  the  most  unaffected  manner 
an  impression  of  the  exalted  and  peculiar  dignity 
of  the  speaker,  and  of  his  complete  freedom  from 
all  selfish  purposes. 

Jesus  Christ  taught  that  obedience  to  God 
should  be  a  principle  of  moral  conduct  maintain- 
ing supreme  authority  in  the  mind,  and  annihilat- 
ing, as  it  were,  every  consideration  which  might 
come  in  competition  with  it,  whatever  its  power  to 
allure  or  to  terrify, —  the  love  of  life  and  its  enjoy- 
ments, the  dread  of  suffering  and  of  death ;  —  and 


252        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

he  enforced  this  requirement  in  a  manner  the  most 
solemn  and  impressive.  "  I  say  to  you,  my  friends, 
Fear  not  those  who  kill  the  body,  and  after  this 
can  do  nothing  more;  but  I  will  instruct  you 
whom  to  fear:  fear  Him  who  has  power,  after 
taking  away  life,  to  cast  into  hell ;  yea$  I  say  to 
you,  fear  Him." 

This,  then,  is  one  distinguishing  characteristic 
of  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  it  is  repre 
sented  by  the  Evangelists.  He  continually  insists 
upon  a  regard  to  God  and  his  moral  government, 
as  the  fundamental  principle  of  conduct.  Upon 
this  principle  all  our  moral  affections  and  habits 
are  to  be  founded.  The  first  doctrine  of  religion, 
as  taught  by  Christ,  is,  that  God  is  to  be  loved 
with  the  whole  heart  and  mind.  The  whole  moral 
nature  of  man  is  to  be  under  the  government  of 
those  affections  and  principles  which  result  from 
just  conceptions  of  the  Deity,  and  of  our  relation 
to  him.  If  you  would  detach  this  truth  from  the 
other  instructions  of  Jesus,  you  must  break  to 
pieces  and  destroy  the  whole  fabric  of  his  religion, 
leaving  nothing  but  disconnected  fragments. 

BUT  the  being  who  is  thus  intimately  related  to 
God, — how  is  he  to  regard  himself,  and  how  long 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  253 

is  this  relation  to  continue "?  It  will  continue  for 
ever ;  he  is  to  regard  himself  as  immortal.  We 
listen  to  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
arch  of  heaven  which  closed  over  us,  and  limited 
our  view  to  a  few  objects  of  this  world,  rolls  away  ; 
all  that  before  surrounded  us  contracts  to  a  span, 
and  an  unlimited  prospect  is  disclosed  of  scenes 
the  most  solemn  and  splendid,  on  which  we  are 
just  about  to  enter.  He  continually  addresses 
man  as  a  being  of  unmeasured  powers,  who  may, 
nay,  who  must,  indulge  in  the  most  glorious  expec- 
tations, who  must  act  habitually  under  a  conscious- 
ness of  his  immortality.  Look  upon  the  world  in 
which  Jesus  Christ  appeared.  It  was  filled  with 
men  sensual,  ignorant,  debased  by  their  supersti- 
tions, driven  about  at  the  mercy  of  every  passion, 
unconscious  of  their  nature,  engrossed  by  the 
objects  of  this  life,  scarcely  thinking  of  anything 
better,  and  lifting  their  eyes  to  contemplate  the 
future  only  to  see  death  always  presenting  itself 
as  the  termination  of  all  those  prospects  and  pur- 
suits in  which  they  were  most  strongly  interested. 
To  men  such  as  these,  he  announced  that  they 
were  beings  of  an  incomparably  higher  order  than 
they  had  imagined  themselves ;  and  that  their  true 
interests  were  of  a  kind  of  which  they  had  hardly 


254       INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

formed  a  conception.  In  his  preaching,  death 
almost  disappeared  from  view  as  something  un- 
worthy of  regard.  "  He  who  puts  his  trust  in  me 
HAS  eternal  life."  "  He  has  passed  from  death  to 
life."  "Whoever  obeys  my  teaching  will  never 
see  death." 

A  short  time  before  his  crucifixion,  this  most 
extraordinary  teacher  is  represented  as  having 
been  present  with  the  sisters  of  a  friend  whom 
he  loved,  and  whom  they  had  just  laid  in  the 
grave.  There  was  everything  in  their  expressions 
of  simple  and  warm  affection,  of  deep  reverence, 
and  of  entire  trust  in  his  kindness  though  he  had 
seemed  to  neglect  them,  to  affect  the  feelings  of 
one  who  knew  and  felt  that  they  who  thus  loved 
him  were  soon  to  be  filled  with  distress  and  agony 
by  the  horrors  of  his  death,  and  that  to  himself  all 
human  sympathy  would  soon  only  be  a  new  source 
of  pain.  He  was  deeply  affected.  The  whole 
story  is  told  with  perfect  nature,  and  the  most 
touching  simplicity.  On  this  occasion,  just  before 
presenting  himself  at  that  tomb  from  which  he 
was  to  recall  the  dead,  he  is  represented  as  declar- 
ing, "  I  am  the  resurrection  and  eternal  life.  He 
who  has  faith  in  me,  though  he  die,  will  live ;  and 
whoever  lives  and  has  faith  in  me  will  never  die." 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       255 

It  may  be  said,  that  these  words  were  never 
uttered;  it  may  be  said,  that  the  character  of 
Christ  as  displayed  in  the  Gospels  is  a  fiction, 
and  that  there  is  little  satisfactory  ground  for 
expecting  any  other  existence  than  the  present. 
Let  us  allow  all  this  for  a  moment,  and  consider 
what  follows.  If  this  be  so,  then  the  whole  nar- 
rative, the  ascribing  to  this  supposed  personage 
the  declaration  which  I  have  quoted,  under  such 
circumstances,  is  a  conception  the  most  affecting 
and  sublime  that  ever  entered  the  human  mind. 
It  blends  together  and  concentrates  in  a  single 
sentence  the  annunciation  of  a  doctrine  of  the 
most  absorbing  interest,  and  a  claim  of  undefined 
and  overwhelming  superiority ;  and  the  expression 
is  at  once  the  most  striking  and  unaffected.  We 
may  search  long  in  all  poetry  and  eloquence  before 
we  shall  discover  a  parallel  to  this  transcendent 
burst  of  genius.  It  implies  an  energy  of  imagina- 
tion and  feeling,  which  I  know  not  where  we 
shall  find  displayed  except  in  the  Gospels  them- 
selves. 

BUT  Jesus  Christ  did  not  inculcate  the  doctrine 
of  immortality  merely  as  a  subject  of  delightful 
contemplation.  He  did  not  teach,  as  did  some  of 


256        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

the  wisest  of  the  ancient  philosophers,  that,  should 
we  exist  hereafter,  we  should  certainly  exist  to  be 
happy.  He  did  not  teach  anything  analogous  to 
what  was  the  prevailing  doctrine  in  his  own  na- 
tion, that  all  the  descendants  of  Israel  were,  as 
such,  secure  of  the  favor  of  God.  He  always  ex- 
hibited the  doctrine  of  immortality  in  connection 
with  that  of  the  moral  government  of  God ;  and 
thus  laid  an  immovable  foundation  for  the  highest 
and  most  unworldly  virtue.  This,  then,  is  another 
characteristic  of  his  preaching.  In  addressing  men 
as  moral  agents,  he  always  addresses  them  as  im- 
mortal beings.  There  is  in  this  respect  a  perfect 
consistency  in  his  preaching.  He  never  forgets 
himself  so  as  to  speak  as  if  he  were  addressing 
mere  creatures  of  this  world.  The  virtue  which 
he  required  is  not  the  sort  of  prudential  morality 
which  may  be  learned  from  the  experience  of  life, 
but  virtue  springing  from  a  sense  of  our  relations 
to  God  and  to  eternity.  Nothing  can  be  more 
admirable,  and,  if  we  are  indeed  immortal,  nothing 
can  be  more  reasonable,  than  the  calm,  decided, 
and,  if  I  may  so  speak,  peremptory  manner  in 
which  he  required  that  the  strongest  fears  and 
hopes  of  the  present  life  should  give  way  without 
resistance  to  those  which  regard  eternity.  "Let 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  257 

him  who  would  be  my  follower  renounce  himself, 
and  come  after  me,  bearing  his  cross.  For  he  who 
would  save  his  life,  will  lose  it ;  and  he  who  may 
lose  his  life  for  my  sake,  will  secure  it.  What 
advantage  would  it  be  to  a  man,  to  gain  the  whole 
world  with  the  loss  of  his  life  ] "  "  BLESSED  will 
you  be  when  men  shall  revile  you,  and  persecute 
you,  and  speak  all  evil  against  you,  falsely,  for 
my  sake.  REJOICE  AND  EXULT  ;  for  your  reward 
in  heaven  will  be  great." 

IT  is  to  be  remembered,  that  the  doctrines  of 
which  I  have  spoken  are  not  truths  occasionally 
adverted  to  by  Jesus  Christ,  as  something  not 
essential  to  his  main  purpose.  They  constitute 
his  religion.  They  are  the  doctrines  which  he 
came  to  teach.  They  are  the  doctrines  to  which 
everything  else  in  his  preaching  is  related,  and  on 
which  everything  depends.  He  came  to  reform 
men,  to  reconcile  them  to  God,  to  establish  the 
reign  of  Heaven ;  and  these  purposes  were  to  be 
effected  by  making  known  to  them  the  true  char- 
acter of  God,  their  relations  to  Him,  and  their 
own  nature  and  destination.  These  doctrines  are 
the  great  light  which  rose  upon  the  nations  that 
were  in  darkness.  He  discovered  God  to  men> 

22* 


258        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

and  made  known  to  them  that   they  were  im- 
mortal. 

IN  order  to  have  a  just  conception  of  the  force  of 
the  argument  to  be  derived  from  these  sublime  doc- 
trines, we  ought  to  compare  them  with  those  which 
philosophy  had  attained  before.  There  is  no  hea- 
then teacher  who  in  wisdom  and  virtue  claims  a 
higher  rank  than  Socrates, — none  between  whom 
and  Jesus  Christ  a  parallel  may  be  instituted  more 
fairly.  His  life  forms  an  era  in  the  history  of 
human  improvement.  In  the  record  of  his  dis- 
courses and  instructions  preserved  by  Xenophon, 
we  find  much  correct,  and  some  false  morality ;  the 
whole  founded,  however,  not  on  very  comprehen- 
sive principles,  but  on  a  wise  observation  of  human 
nature  and  human  life  as  they  lay  before  him. 
There  are  many  excellent  rules  of  prudence,  and 
some  high  and  generous  sentiments.  There  are 
views  of  the  character  of  the  gods,  which  would  be 
imperfectly  true  if  applied  to  the  one  God ;  but 
there  is  nothing  in  this  work  of  his  very  intelli- 
gent disciple,  which  affords  an  intimation  that 
Socrates  was  not  a  polytheist.  From  the  writings 
of  Plato,  it  may  be  inferred  that  his  master  or 
himself  had  a  conception  of  one  Supreme  Being ; 


GENUINENESS  OF   THE   GOSPELS.  259 

but  amid  the  obscurity  and  the  extravagant  imagi- 
nations of  that  Dialogue  in  which  this  conception 
is  particularly  developed,  it  is  impossible  to  dis- 
cern any  definite  representation  of  the  Divinity 
corresponding  to  what  is  so  clearly  presented  in 
the  Gospels.  The  morality  of  Socrates,  as  far  as 
it  appears  in  the  Memorabilia  of  Xenophon,  is 
based  on  the  relations  of  man  in  the  present  life, 
and  not  at  all  upon  the  relations  of  man  to  eter- 
nity. It  is  true  that  in  the  writings  of  Plato,  and 
especially  in  that  beautiful  Dialogue  which  con- 
tains the  discourse  of  Socrates  on  the  day  of  his 
death,  he  is  represented  as  believing  and  teaching 
the  immortality  of  the  soul.  In  that  Dialogue 
there  is  a  passage  which  stands  out  a  brightly 
illuminated  point  above  the  common  level  of  hea- 
then philosophy.  It  is  a  distinct  and  eloquent 
recognition  of  the  sanctions  of  the  future  life  as 
considerations  of  the  highest  importance  to  govern 
our  conduct  in  the  present.  It  might  have  been 
written  by  a  Christian ;  but  in  the  writings  of  a 
Christian  it  would  be  passed  over  without  particu- 
lar notice.  That  Socrates  should  afterward  speak 
doubtfully  of  the  doctrines  which  he  had  main- 
tained, is  not,  perhaps,  strange.  But  it  is  with 
strong  feelings  of  surprise  and  disappointment 


260  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

that  we  become  convinced  that  the  immortality 
which  he  taught  was  an  immortality  without  con- 
tinued consciousness ;  an  immortality  of  the  soul, 
but  not  of  the  individual;  an  immortality  in  which 
the  spiritual  part  was  to  pass  through  successive 
changes,  losing  at  each  transition  the  memory  of 
its  former  state.*  After  this,  it  is  not  matter  of 
much  wonder,  that  the  whole  should  appear  to 
have  been  father  a  delightful  poetic  vision,  than  a 
sober  and  practical  speculation.  Nor  is  it  surpris- 
ing to  find,  when  Plato  is  with  difficulty,  and,  it 
may  be  thought,  without  success,  endeavoring  to 
prove  that  a  man  should  retain  his  integrity,  to 
whatever  evils  it  may  expose  him,  that  he  makes 
no  reference  to  the  future  life ;  that  he  does  not 
think  of  saying,  with  Jesus  Christ,  "  For  your  re- 
ward in  heaven  will  be  great." 

The  speculations  of  Plato  seem  often  rather  a 
play  of  the  imagination  than  an  exercise  of  the 
understanding,  and  have  often  probably  but  a  re- 
mote relation  to  the  practical  philosophy  of  his 
master.  In  his  Dialogues,  Socrates  is  introduced, 
like  the  other  speakers,  as  a  dramatic  personage. 

*  [The  passage  of  Plato  here  referred  to  (Phaedo,  cc.  129,  130,  p. 
107,  C.)  is  quoted,  with  remarks,  in  the  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness 
of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  IH.  pp.  111-113,  note.] 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  261 

Of  the  real  discourses  of  that  philosopher,  those 
discourses  which  took  such  strong  hold  on  the 
minds  of  men,  we  have,  I  conceive,  a  fair  specimen 
in  the  Memorabilia,  perhaps  the  most  remarkable 
book  which  has  come  down  to  us  from  heathen 
antiquity.  In  its  form  and  purpose  it  bears  no 
inconsiderable  resemblance  to  the  Gospels.  In 
the  latter,  however,  we  have  the  doctrines  and 
instructions  of  Christ  recorded  by  four  unlettered 
men ;  while  in  the  former  we  have  those  of  Socra- 
tes preserved  by  a  philosopher,  writing  with  Attic 
elegance.  We  may,  then,  institute  a  comparison 
between  them.  The  Memorabilia  contains  many 
correct  views  of  the  relations  of  man  to  man,  some 
notices  of  the  supposed  goodness  and  wisdom  of 
imagined  superior  powers,  and  just  directions  for 
attaining  our  true  dignity  and  happiness,  men  be- 
ing regarded  only  as  beings  of  this  world,  but 
still  as  moral  and  intellectual  beings.  Turn  now 
to  the  Gospels,  and  consider  the  doctrines  which 
are  there  displayed.  Forget,  as  far  as  you  can,  all 
those  conceptions  with  which  you  have  been  famil- 
iar from  childhood,  and  which  you  have  received 
directly  or  indirectly  from  these  very  works.  Come 
to  their  study  in  the  state  of  mind  which  you  may 
suppose  to  have  been  that  of  an  enlightened  Hea- 


262  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

then  who  should  in  any  way  have  become  con- 
vinced of  their  truth ;  and  thus  lay  yourself  open, 
as  far  as  you  are  able,  to  a  full  impression  of  the 
overpowering  sublimity  of  the  truths  which  they 
contain.  In  reading  the  work  of  Xenophon,  our 
state  of  mind  may  resemble  that  of  one  passing 
through  a  pleasant  and  well-cultivated  country, 
who  sees  everywhere  proofs  of  convenience  and 
comfort  and  human  ingenuity.  In  the  study  of 
the  Gospels,  if  we  do  indeed  fully  comprehend 
and  feel  the  doctrines  which  were  taught  by 
Christ,  our  emotions  will  be  like  those  of  a  trav- 
eller placed  where  the  eternal  objects  of  nature 
rise  around  him  in  their  grandeur  and  awfulness, 
from  whose  view  the  works  of  man  with  all  their 
littleness  have  disappeared,  and  upon  whom  the 
feeling  comes  that  he  is  alone  with  God. 


LET  us  now  consider  what  there  is  characteristic 
in  the  moral  principles  which  Jesus  Christ  is  rep- 
resented by  the  Evangelists  as  having  inculcated, 
and  which  all  the  doctrines  and  sanctions  of  his 
religion  are  intended  to  support  and  enforce.  The 
morality  which  he  taught  is  the  most  pure  and 
comprehensive.  It  was  taught  to  a  world  lying  in 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       263 

ignorance  and  wickedness ;  and  it  coincides  with 
the  last  results  of  the  most  enlightened  philoso- 
phy. It  was  taught  eighteen  hundred  years  ago ; 
yet  so  extensive  are  its  requirements,  that  they 
are  still  but  imperfectly  comprehended  by  many 
of  Christ's  disciples.  I  do  not  say  that  they  are 
imperfectly  obeyed,  —  this  would  be  universally 
true, — but  that  there  are  many  by  whom  they  are 
but  partially  understood.  This  is  not  because 
they  are  expressed  obscurely,  or  because  they 
breathe  any  spirit  of  fanaticism,  or  require  any 
course  of  conduct  opposed  to  nature  and  reason. 
It  is  because  there  are  many  who  do  not  under- 
stand their  own  nature,  their  true  interest,  and 
their  relations  to  their  fellow-creatures. 

We  render  to  every  man  his  due ;  we  violate 
no  man's  rights ;  there  is  no  one  who  can  com- 
plain that  we  have  injured  him;  we  have  broken 
no  one  of  the  commandments.  All  this  is  very 
well ;  and  we  fancy,  perhaps,  that  we  have  fulfilled 
our  obligations.  But  if  this  be  the  whole  of  our 
goodness,  we  are  yet  very  far  from  the  virtue  re- 
quired by  Jesus  Christ.  We  do  no  evil;  — we  are 
required  to  exert  ourselves  habitually  to  do  good. 
There  is  a  demand  upon  us  for  the  most  disinter- 
ested and  the  most  active  benevolence.  He  who 


264:  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF   THE 

would  be  a  disciple  of  Christ  must  acquire  the 
virtue  of  Christian  charity.  He  must  blend  and 
lose  his  individual  interests  in  those  of  his  fam- 
ily, his  friends,  his  country,  and  mankind.  It  is 
the  business  of  a  Christian  to  render  services  to 
his  fellow-men.  "Let  him  who  would  be  great 
among  you  minister  to  you,  and  let  him  who  would 
be  chief  among  you  be  your  servant."  What  min 
istry  and  what  services  are  required  appears  from 
the  example  proposed  for  imitation  in  the  words 
which  follow:  "Even  as  the  Son  of  Man  came 
not  to  be  served,  but  to  serve,  and  to  give  his  life 
to  ransom  many."  "  Do  good  and  lend,  hoping 
for  nothing  in  return."  "  Do  to  others  whatever 
you  would  that  they  should  do  to  you."  "  I  was 
hungry,  and  you  gave  me  food ;  thirsty,  and  you 
gave  me  drink ;  a  stranger,  and  you  received  me 
into  your  houses;  naked,  and  you  clothed  me; 
sick,  and  you  took  care  of  me ;  in  prison,  and  you 
came  to  me In  doing  so  to  one  of  the  hum- 
blest of  these  my  brothers,  you  did  so  to  me." 

But  what  are  the  limits  of  this  charity,  as  it  was 
inculcated  by  Jesus  Christ  I  It  has  none.  It 
must  form  itself  upon  the  model  of  the  infinite 
goodness  of  the  common  Father.  It  must  tri- 
umph over  inveterate  prejudices  and  bitter  hostil- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       265 

ity ;  —  the  Samaritan  is  the  neighbor  of  the  Jew. 
It  must  forget  insult  and  persecution  and  cruelty ; 
and  when  the  occasion  of  rendering  good  for  evil 
has  come,  it  must  regard  an  enemy  merely  as 
an  erring  and  unhappy  fellow-creature,  for  whose 
benefit  and  improvement  it  is  our  duty  to  labor. 
"You  have  heard  that  it  was  said,  Thou  shalt 
love  thy  neighbor  and  hate  thine  enemy.  But  I 
say  to  you,  Love  your  enemies,  bless  them  who 
curse  you,  do  good  to  those  who  hate  you,  and 
pray  for  those  who  harass  and  persecute  you ;  that 
you  maybe  children  of  your  Father  in  heaven; 
for  he  causes  his  sun  to  rise  on  the  bad  and  on  the 
good,  and  sends  rain  on  the  righteous  and  on  the 
unrighteous."  The  production  of  happiness  is  the 
only  ultimate  end  of  the  operations  of  God ;  and 
if  we  would  secure  his  favor,  and  attain  the  perfec- 
tion of  our  nature,  we  must  be  fellow-workers 
with  God. 

One  can  scarcely  avoid  feeling  some  reluctance 
to  state  the  extent  of  these  requirements,  when  he 
looks  around,  and  sees  how  imperfectly  they  have 
been  obeyed;  how  imperfectly  they  are  obeyed; 
how  many  seem  scarcely  to  have  a  notion  of  their 
existence,  and  how  many  there  are  who  look  with 
a  sort  of  compassionate  or  contemptuous  superior- 


266  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ity  upon  all  conduct  which  cannot  be  resolved  into 
prudent  selfishness,  —  satisfied  with  their  own  sa- 
gacity, proud  of  their  success,  and  regarding  "  the 
wisdom  which  is  from  above  "  only  as  the  notion 
of  men  weak,  enthusiastic,  and  ignorant  of  the 
world. 

Compare  the  precepts  of  Jesus  Christ  with  the 
moral  principles,  and,  if  you  are  willing  to  go  still 
further,  with  the  moral  practice  of  the  age  in 
which  they  were  delivered ;  compare  his  code  of 
duty  with  the  conceptions  which  men  have  derived 
from  their  natural  sentiments  operated  upon  by 
the  circumstances  common  to  us  all ;  and  it  will  be 
perceived  that  it  is  indeed  a  wonderful  system  of 
morals.  It  coincides,  as  I  have  said,  with  the  last 
results  of  enlightened  philosophy;  but  it  is  be- 
cause philosophy  has  been  enlightened  and  guided 
by  these  very  precepts  inculcated  in  the  Gospels. 
How  does  it  happen,  —  for  this,  it  must  be  recol- 
lected, is  the  question  before  us,, —  how  does  it 
happen  that  these  precepts  are  found  in  the  Gos- 
pels ^  How  was  it  that  the  writers  of  these  books 
formed  a  conception  of  such  a  teacher  as  they 
have  described'? 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  267 


CHAPTER    III. 

THE  CHARACTER  OF  CHRIST  AS  IT  APPEARS  IN  THE  GOSPELS. 
(CONTINUED.) 

SECTION  II. 
His  Personal  Character. 

IN  the  conception  of  a  divine  teacher,  much 
more  is  required  than  that  his  doctrines  and  in- 
structions should  be  worthy  of  God ;  and,  conform- 
ably to  this  remark,  the  personal  character  which 
in  the  Gospels  is  ascribed  to  Jesus  Christ  is  most 
striking  and  original.  At  the  same  time,  there  is 
such  an  air  of  truth  in  these  writings,  that,  what- 
ever may  be  any  one's  doubts  or  opinions,  he  can 
hardly  read  them  attentively  without  a  strong  feel- 
ing that  he  is  reading  a  narrative  of  real  events, 
and  without  conceiving  of  the  character  of  Christ 
as  one  which  actually  existed.  He  is  represented 
as  not  only  destitute  of  all  advantages  of  rank  or 
station,  but,  still  more,  as  placed  in  circumstances 


268  INTEKNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

which  might  expose  him  to  contempt  and  derision  ; 
yet  he  constantly  appears  as  maintaining  an  im- 
measurable superiority  over  all  other  men,  by  the 
moral  force  and  dignity  of  his  character.  Every- 
thing in  his  words  and  actions  is  just  to  the  origi- 
nal conception.  He  makes  claim  to  the  highest 
authority,  calmly,  without  effort  or  exaggeration. 
He  announces  himself  as  connected  with  God  in 
a  manner  in  which  no  other  human  being  ever 
was ;  but  he  is  able  to  support  himself  on  the  ele- 
vation which  he  assumes.  There  is  no  taint  of 
human  weakness,  of  vanity  or  arrogance,  in  his 
declarations  or  actions.  On  the  contrary,  he  re- 
gards nothing  as  humiliating,  but  what  in  truth  is 
so.  He  converses  with  tax-gatherers  and  sinners, 
because  his  office  was  to  call  sinners  to  reforma- 
tion. He  is  content  to  be  surrounded  with  a  com- 
pany of  poor,  ignorant  Apostles;  but  they  had, 
or  might  be  formed  to  have,  the  moral  qualities 
required  in  the  future  ministers  of  his  religion. 
He  travels  about  in  poverty,  having  no  habitation 
of  his  own  "  where  to  lay  his  head."  He  does  it, 
because  it  was  required  by  the  nature  of  those 
duties  which  he  had  to  perform ;  and  especially  in 
order  that,  by  the  example  of  his  own  poverty,  he 
might  destroy  in  the  most  effectual  manner  all 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  269 

worldly  expectations  in  those  who  were  disposed 
to  join  him.  He  washes  the  feet  of  his  disciples. 
There  may  be  abundant  ostentation  in  pretended 
humility,  but  there  is  none  here;  his  object  was 
to  give  his  disciples  a  lesson  which  it  is  evident 
they  needed.  In  all  his  actions  there  is  a  com- 
posed, unaffected  dignity ;  a  steady  regard  to  the 
high  purposes  of  his  mission;  a  perfect  corre- 
spondence between  his  conduct  and  his  claims. 
This  character  is  particularly  discovered  in  the 
exercise  of  his  supernatural  powers.  He  performs 
the  most  astonishing  miracles,  but  there  is  noth- 
ing of  theatrical  display.  "  He  was  loved  by  the 
Father,  and  the  Father  had  shown  him  how  to  do 
what  he  himself  does."  He  appears  like  one  of 
whom  this  declaration  is  true ;  like  one  too  highly 
favored  by  God  to  be  affected  by  the  admiration 
and  astonishment  of  men. 

I  WILL  not  here  repeat  what  I  have  had  occa- 
sion to  remark  before  on  the  distinctive  character 
of  his  miracles ;  but  it  is  proper  to  observe,  that 
if  we  suppose  no  miracles  to  have  been  performed, 
and  the  narratives  of  them  to  be  consequently  a 
work  of  imagination,  then  the  difficult  question 
arises,  how  it  happened  that  the  writers  of  the  Gos- 


23 


270  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

pels  conceived  with  such  truth  the  character  which 
the  miracles  of  a  messenger  from  God  ought  to 
have,  when  all  other  narrators  of  fictitious  miracles 
have  failed  so  glaringly  in  every  similar  attempt. 

BUT  in  the  wonderful  history  contained  in  the 
Gospels  there  are  other  traits  as  striking  as 
those  which  I  have  mentioned.  Consider,  for  in- 
stance, the  whole  character  of  Christ's  discourses 
in  reference  to  that  object,  which,  from  the  nature 
of  the  case,  he  must  have  had  first  in  view,  the 
gaining  of  followers  and  disciples.  He  uses  no 
arts  of  seduction.  He  takes  no  advantage  of  the 
prejudices  or  passions  of  those  about  him.  In  so 
far  as  they  were  mischievous  and  evil,  he  makes  no 
compromise  with  them.  He  meets  and  opposes 
the  darling  hopes,  the  cherished  selfishness,  and 
the  inveterate  and  consecrated  errors  of  his  coun- 
trymen, with  a  tone  of  authority  the  most  direct 
and  absolute.  He  speaks  to  his  hearers,  in  the 
plainest  language,  of  the  hypocrisy  and  of  the 
vices  of  those  whom  they  had  been  accustomed  to 
reverence  for  their  reputed  sanctity,  and  to  regard 
as  leaders  and  examples.  He  admits  but  one 
claim,  and  demands  but  one  requisite,  to  his  favor, 
— a  sincere  purpose  of  obedience  to  God.  He  repels 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  271 

from  him  those  who  come  with  any  worldly  views. 
There  can  be  nothing  more  decisive  than  the  lan- 
guage in  which  he  annihilates  all  earthly  expecta- 
tions, and  presents  to  his  disciples  a  distinct  image 
of  the  life  of  suffering  and  danger  on  which  they 
were  about  to  enter.  "  They  will  revile  you,  they 
will  persecute  you ;  they  will  speak  all  evil  against 
you,  falsely,  for  my  sake  " ;  "  they  will  scourge  you 
in  their  synagogues";  "brother  will  deliver  up 
brother  to  death,  and  the  father  his  child.  .... 
You  will  be  hated  by  all  men  for  my  sake." 
"  He  who  kills  you  will  think  that  he  is  offering 
a  sacrifice  to  God." 

What  shall  we  say  to  the  conception  of  a 
teacher,  who  is  represented  as  making  such  pre- 
dictions to  his  disciples  1  Is  it  drawn  from  real- 
ity ?  or  are  we  indebted  to  the  genius  of  certain 
unknown  writers  for  this  extraordinary  delinea- 
tion'? 

Let  us  attend  to  another  example  of  his  mode 
of  addressing  those  who  came  to  him :  "  Let  him 
who  would  be  my  follower  renounce  himself,  and 
come  after  me,  bearing  his  cross."  The  Common 
Version,  in  rendering  "deny  himself,"  expresses 
nothing  like  the  force  of  the  original,  which  im- 
plies a  total  putting  off  of  all  selfish  affections. 


272  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

We  are  familiar  with  the  figure  of  "  taking  up  the 
cross,"  and  the  figurative  meaning  of  these  words 
is,  for  the  most  part,  the  only  one  which  presents 
itself  to  our  minds.  "We  can  hardly  feel  the  im- 
pression which  it  must  have  made  upon  those  to 
whom  the  horrible  torture  of  crucifixion,  as  in- 
flicted upon  the  most  wretched  outcasts  of  society, 
was  not  an  uncommon  spectacle.  He  who  was  to 
suffer  this  dreadful  death  was  compelled  to  bear 
his  cross  to  the  place  of  execution.  It  is  to  this 
that  Christ  alludes.  No  form  of  words  could  rep- 
resent to  his  followers  with  more  fearful  distinct- 
ness, that  they  were  to  prepare  themselves  for 
torture  and  death. 

If  it  be  allowed  that  these  predictions  and 
declarations  were  really  uttered  by  Jesus  Christ, 
it  must  be  admitted,  I  think,  that  he  could  have 
gained  no  proselytes  to  a  life  of  severe  privation 
and  suffering,  few  converts  to  the  endurance  of 
insults,  stripes,  and  rancorous  persecution,  except 
by  the  most  satisfactory  evidence  that  he  had 
something  to  promise  as  a  compensation,  or,  in 
other  words,  by  the  clearest  and  most  irresisti- 
ble proofs  of  his  divine  mission  and  authority. 
But  if  it  be  admitted  that  he  gave  such  proofs,  we 
arrive  at  once  at  the  conclusion  which  we  wish  to 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       273 

reach ;  for  there  will  then  be  no  reason  to  doubt, 
that  the  whole  representation  of  him  given  in 
the  Gospels  is  drawn  from  reality.  If  it  be  said, 
on  the  other  hand,  that  these  words  were  not 
uttered  by  Christ,  but  were  put  into  his  mouth  by 
the  writers  of  these  histories,  still  it  must  be  con- 
ceded that  they  correspond  with  admirable  truth 
to  the  original  conception  of  him  as  a  messenger 
from  God.  He  appears  as  he  ought ;  clearly  an- 
nouncing to  his  disciples  what  they  must  prepare 
themselves  to  suffer;  furnishing  them,  indeed, 
with  the  strongest  motives  to  endurance,  but 
motives  which  touched  upon  nothing  earthly; 
and  preparing  them  for  that  hard  warfare,  in 
which  they  were  to  be  the  victims,  against  the 
vices  and  passions  of  men,  against  obstinate  super- 
stition and  malignant  bigotry.  It  is  to  be  recol- 
lected, likewise,  that  he  speaks,  with  this  severe 
calmness,  of  suffering  which  pressed  equally  upon 
himself  and  upon  his  disciples.  It  was  for  his  sake 
that  they  would  be  hated.  The  conception  of  him 
is  perfectly  just,  and  in  such  a  case  as  the  present, 
this  is  saying  very  much ;  but  it  is  not  saying  all 
that  we  ought.  It  exhibits  a  simple  and  awful 
composure  of  mind,  compared  with  which  all  the 
poetical  representations  of  Roman  stoicism  appear 


274  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

like  mere  displays  for  the  theatre.  The  conception 
of  Jesus  Christ  calling  all  men  to  come  to  him, 
and  at  the  same  time  thus  distinctly  forewarning 
them  of  the  earthly  fate  which  awaited  equally  his 
followers  and  himself,  if  it  be  not  derived  from 
reality,  implies  a  boldness  and  originality  of  imagi- 
nation of  which  there  is  no  other  example. 


IT  is  as  a  messenger  of  God,  that  Jesus  Christ 
is  exhibited  in  the  Gospels ;  and  his  conduct  and 
discourses  during  the  time  of  his  ministry  princi- 
pally have  relation  to  his  office.  He  seldom 
appears  as  acting  in  the  common  relations  of 
man  to  man,  or  under  circumstances  very  anal- 
ogous to  those  in  which  other  men  may  be  placed. 
Comparatively  speaking,  we  see  but  little  of  his 
private  character  (to  use  these  words  in  their 
strictest  sense)  till  the  closing  scenes  of  his  life, 
when  it  breaks  forth  with  unspeakable  splendor. 
Wherever  it  elsewhere  appears,  it  corresponds  to 
that  moral  perfection  which  he  manifested  in  the 
execution  of  his  peculiar  office.  In  relation  to 
this  subject,  as  well  as  to  others  of  which  I  have 
spoken,  there  are  passages  which,  as  they  stand  in 
the  Common  Version,  require  explanation,  though, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       275 

even  if  left  unexplained,  they  may  not  essentially 
affect  our  conclusions.  But,  in  regard  to  the  char- 
acter of  Christ,  I  will  here  notice  one  or  two 
concerning  which  I  think  the  most  difficulty  may 
be  felt. 

AT  the  marriage  feast  at  Cana,  when  the  mother 
of  Jesus  informs  him  that  the  wine  is  spent,  there 
seems  something  harsh  in  his  reply:  "Woman, 
what  have  you  to  do  with  me  I  *  My  hour  has 
not  yet  come."  But  it  may  be  observed,  in  the 
first  place,  that  the  forms  of  courtesy,  being  arbi- 
trary, vary  at  different  times,  and  in  different 
countries ;  and  that  to  address  one  by  the  appel- 
lation of  Woman  was  not  considered  disrespectful 
by  the  ancients.t  By  the  words,  "  What  have  you 
to  do  with  mel"  our  Saviour  undoubtedly  intended 
to  repress  all  interference  of  his  mother  with  the 
exercise  of  his  miraculous  powers.  Our  concep- 
tions of  her  are  principally  formed  from  the  beau- 
tiful fictions  of  poetry  and  painting,  in  which 

"  holiest  Mary  bends 
In  virgin  beauty  o'er  her  blessed  babe." 

*  Or,  "  why  do  you  trouble  me  ?  "  —  It  is  thus  that  the  words  should 
be  rendered,  not,  as  in  the  Common  Version,  "  What  have  I  to  do  with 
thee?" 

f  [See  John  xix.  26.] 


276  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

There  is,  indeed,  no  reason  to  doubt  the  real  excel- 
lence of  her  character;  but  there  is  as  little  doubt, 
that  she  entertained  the  common  belief  of  her 
countrymen  respecting  a  Messiah  who  was  to  be 
the  greatest  of  princes,  far  more  glorious  than  his 
ancestor  David.  With  this  belief,  trusting  that 
her  son  was  the  Messiah,  it  was  scarcely  possible 
that  she  should  not  entertain  hopes  and  feelings 
very  inconsistent  with  what  was  really  to  be  his 
fate  and  her  own.  The  mother  of  the  prince  of 
Israel  and  of  the  world  must  have  looked  forward 
to  something  very  different  from  a  life  of  obscurity 
and  suffering.  Moreover,  it  was  not  in  human  na- 
ture that  she  should  not  have  had  some  disposition 
to  exert  over  her  son  the  authority  and  influence 
of  a  mother.  But,  in  the  exercise  of  his  office  as 
the  minister  of  God,  it  was  impossible  for  him  to 
yield  to  any  human  direction.  The  narrative  we 
are  considering  implies  that  she  wished  him,  on 
the  occasion  recorded,  to  make  some  display  of  his 
supernatural  powers,  or,  at  least,  in  some  way  to 
manifest  himself  as  the  Messiah;  and  it  implies 
also  that  she  had  previously  urged  him  to  do  so. 
Without  the  last  supposition,  we  cannot  account 
for  our  Saviour's  putting  the  sense  which  he  obvi- 
ously did  upon  the  very  slight  intimation  of  his 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  277 

mother ;  nor  for  her  subsequent  direction  to  the 
servants  soon  after  the  discouragement  she  had 
received.  It  was  to  repress  those  feelings  and 
dispositions  of  his  mother  which  I  have  just  de- 
scribed, feelings  and  dispositions  which  could  only 
serve  to  aggravate  her  future  sufferings,  that  our 
Saviour  made  the  answer  recorded.  It  was  repel- 
ling, but  it  was  intended  to  save  her  some  of  the 
anguish  of  disappointment;  and  the  nature  of  his 
office  rendered  it  necessary  to  repress  all  interfer- 
ence on  her  part.  He  was  compelled  to  separate 
himself  in  some  degree  from  her,  both  for  her  own 
sake,  and  because  his  duties  were  such  as  did  not 
admit  of  his  receiving  her  counsel,  or  being  affected 
by  her  influence.  He  had,  probably,  announced 
to  her  before,  that  his  ministry  would  be  exercised 
in  poverty  and  suffering,  and  terminated  in  a  short 
time  by  a  cruel  death ;  and  she,  like  his  disciples 
at  a  subsequent  period,  had  been  unable  to  con- 
form her  mind  to  the  comprehension  and  belief  of 
what  was  so  utterly  foreign  to  all  her  previous 
conceptions  respecting  the  Messiah.  It  is  to  his 
last  sufferings  that  he  alludes  in  the  words,  "  My 
hour  has  not  yet  come.'M  His  purpose  in  these 

*  The  reasons  for  understanding  these  words  in  the  sense  above  as- 
signed are,  first,  that  the  expression  is  elsewhere  in  St.  John's  Gospel 
24 


278        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

words  I  conceive  to  have  been  to  bring  forcibly 
home  to  the  mind  of  his  mother  what  he  had  be- 
fore declared  to  her  respecting  the  intimate  con- 
nection between  his  office  and  his  death ;  and  the 
brief  interval  which  was  to  intervene  between  his 
assuming  the  former,  and  his  submitting  to  the 
latter.  Their  force  is  this:  "Why  do  you  urge 
me  to  manifest  myself  as  the  Messiah  1  The  hour 
for  my  last  sufferings  has  not  yet  come." 

Having,  however,  repressed  the  interference  of 
his  mother,  it  seems  to  have  been  partly  in  com- 
pliance with  her  wishes  that  he  performed  a  mir- 
acle on  this  occasion.  The  miracle  itself  has  been 
objected  to,  as  giving  encouragement  to  intemper- 
ance. This  charge,  however,  it  must,  I  think,  be 
allowed,  is  very  inconsistent  with  the  whole  char- 
acter and  life  of  Christ.  It  is  not  likely  that  there 
was  any  excess  at  an  entertainment  where  the  wine 
was  deficient  through  the  poverty  of  the  host,  as 
appears  to  have  been  the  case  in  the  present  in- 


used  in  this  sense,  as  in  ch.  vii.  30  (and  so  viii.  20),  "No  one  laid 
hands  on  him,  for  his  hour  had  not  yet  come " ;  —  xiii.  1,  "But  Jesus 
knew  that  the  hour  had  come  for  him  to  pass  from  this  world  to  the 
Father";  —  xvii.  1,  "Father,  the  hour  has  come":  —  and,  secondly, 
because  this  sense  suits  with  the  connection  and  .circumstances  of  the 
case,  which  no  other  that  has  been  proposed  seems  to  me  to  do. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  279 

stance.  When  the  master  of  the  feast  says,  "  Men 
commonly  produce  their  good  wine  first,  and,  when 
the  guests  have  drunk  freely,*  then  that  which  is 
poorer,"  he  merely  mentions  a  common  custom, 
from  which  nothing  can  be  inferred  respecting  the 
temperance  of  the  guests  on  the  present  occasion, 
or  indeed  on  any  other  to  which  his  remark  might 
apply,  except  that  it  seems  a  rule  rather  adapted  to 
check  than  to  promote  excess.  Intoxication  is  not 
a  vice  to  which  inhabitants  of  a  warm  climate  are 
disposed.  The  wine  used  at  this  time  was  probably 
drunk  with  the  meal,  rather  than  subsequent  to 
it ;  and  we  must  not  transfer  to  the  feast  of  a  poor 
family  in  Galilee  notions  derived  from  the  luxu- 
rious entertainments  of  ancient  or  modern  times. 
Especially  we  must  recollect,  that  an  evident  mir- 
acle was  the  least  likely  of  all  events  to  promote 
thoughtless  and  improper  indulgence. 

OUR  Saviour's  treatment  of  the  Syro-Phcenician 
woman  who  besought  him  to  cure  her  daughter, 
also  requires  some  explanation.!  It  is  to  be  recol- 

*  Thus  the  word  in  the  original  is  to  be  understood,  in  the  connec- 
tion in  which  it  stands.  In  its  primary,  etymological  sense,  it  means 
nothing  more  than  "  to  drink  wine,"  being  derived  from  pedv,  "wine." 

f  See  Matthew  xv.  21-29 ;  Mark  vii.  24-31. 


280  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

lected,  that  his  disciples  at  this  time  shared  in  the 
common  narrow  prejudices  of  the  Jews  in  respect 
to  other  nations.  They  would  have  been  dissatis- 
fied, their  feelings  would  have  revolted,  if  their 
Master,  the  Jewish  Messiah,  had  at  once  performed 
a  miracle  for  the  benefit  of  a  Heathen.  By  his 
delay,  by  suffering  her  to  importune  him  without 
an  answer,  their  natural  feelings  of  humanity  were 
left  to  operate  in  her  favor.  They  themselves  at 
last  take  her  part,  and  ask  him  to  "  send  her  away 
satisfied  " ;  for  their  words  may  express  this  mean- 
ing ;  and  that  this  was  in  fact  their  meaning  ap- 
pears from  the  reply  of  Christ.  By  what  he  fur- 
ther said,  he  gave  her  an  opportunity  of  showing 
herself,  not  merely  an  object  of  compassion,  but  of 
approbation.  He  thus  afforded  her  a  new  source 
of  gratification,  and  the  incident  at  the  same  time 
tended  still  further  to  enlarge  the  feelings  of  his 
disciples.  The  interest  which  they  took  in  her 
case,  and  the  praise  of  her  which  their  Master  ex- 
pressed, must  have  served  to  break  down  their 
illiberal  prejudices.  It  is  be  observed,  likewise, 
that  the  words  of  Christ  have  a  different  effect  in 
the  original  from  what  they  have  as  rendered  in 
the  Common  Version,  —  "  It  is  not  meet  to  take 
the  children's  bread,  and  to  cast  it  to  dogs."  The 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE   GOSPELS.  281 

last  word,  in  the  original,  is  a  diminutive,  —  one 

of  that  class  of  diminutives  which   is   commonly 

used  in  expressions  of  familiarity  or  endearment. 

It  properly  denotes  those  little  dogs  which  were 

kept  as  playthings.     It  is  evident  whj 

air  is  given  to  the  whole 

stance.  (ftllTIVE  RSIT7, 

^^v 

THE  miraculous  cure  of  the  Ga< 
niacs  was  accompanied  by  the  destruction  of  a 
herd  of  swine ;  which  was  of  course  a  considera- 
ble loss  to  the  owner.*  The  miracle  forms  in  this 
respect  an  exception  to  the  common,  purely  benefi- 
cent character  of  the  miracles  ascribed  to  Christ. 
I  am  inclined  to  think  that  there  was  some  evi- 
dent, specific  reason  for  the  infliction  of  this  loss, 
which  does  not  appear  in  the  narrative.  The  flesh 
of  swine  was  a  food  prohibited  by  the  Jewish  Law, 
and  if  the  owner*,  as  seems  most  probable,  was  a 
Jew,  he  manifested  in  keeping  them  a  disregard 
to  the  precepts  of  his  religion.  We  are  not 
obliged,  however,  to  have  recourse  to  any  expla- 
nation of  this  sort.  It  is  only  necessary  to  recur  to 
general  principles.  A  miracle  is,  properly  speak- 

*  See  Matthew  viii.  28-34 ;  Mark  v.  1-20  ;  Luke  viii.  26-39. 
24* 


282  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

ing,  an  act  of  God.  The  human  agent  to  whom 
we  may  refer  it  is  merely  an  ostensible  agent,  and  is 
to  be  regarded  solely  as  the  minister  of  God.  But 
of  the  acts  of  God  we  must  judge  upon  very  differ- 
ent principles  from  those  which  we  apply  to  the 
acts  of  men.  When,  in  the  common  course  of  his 
providence,  he  deprives  us  of  our  possessions,  we 
believe  that  he  does  it  in  infinite  wisdom  and 
goodness.  It  is  equally  consistent  with  his  wis- 
dom and  goodness,  that  he  should  do  the  same  by 
a  miracle.  The  circumstance  that  the  act  is  mi- 
raculous does  not  in  any  degree  affect  its  character 
in  other  respects.  In  the  exercise  of  perfect  recti- 
tude and  benevolence,  God  may  do,  and  is  contin- 
ually doing,  what  it  would  be  most  unjust  and 
injurious  for  one  human  being  to  do  to  another. 
*N"ow  it  is  not  the  act  of  a  human  being,  but  the 
act  of  God,  which  we  are  considering.  It  was  not 
Christ,  but  God,  who  inflicted  this  loss ;  and,  viewed 
in  this  light,  all  inquiry  respecting  the  particular 
cause  why  it  was  inflicted,  and  all  discussion  of  its 
reason  or  justice  in  reference  to  the  owner,  are  as 
much  out  of  place  as  they  would  be  concerning  a 
fire,  or  a  shipwreck,  or  an  earthquake.  But,  put- 
ting the  question  respecting  the  loss  of  the  owner 
out  of  view,  there  is  a  reason  which  may  be  as- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       283 

signed  for  the  destruction  of  the  animals.  It 
served  at  once  to  render  the  reality  of  the  mira- 
cle evident  and  indisputable,  and  to  give  it  greater 
notoriety.  It  does  not  appear  that  Christ  was  at 
any  subsequent  period  in  the  country  of  the  Gad- 
arenes ;  his  present  visit  was  very  short,  and  it 
was  desirable,  therefore,  to  produce  at  once  a  strong 
impression,  and  to  excite  general  attention  to  his 
ministry.  The  miracle  was  of  a  nature  particularly 
adapted  to  effect  these  purposes.  That  these  pur- 
poses were  intended  may  appear  from  the  direc- 
tion of  Christ  to  the  person  whom  he  had  cured, 
whom  he  would  not  suffer  to  accompany  him ;  but 
whom,  contrary  to  his  usual  practice,  he  directed 
to  return,  and  to  publish  what  great  things  had 
been  done  for  him. 

WITH  one  exception,  which  I  shall  notice  im- 
mediately, I  have  now  mentioned  all  those  pas- 
sages concerning  which  I  have  at  any  time  felt 
the  most  difficulty  myself.  But  these  passages  are 
to  be  viewed  under  another  aspect  than  that  in 
which  we  have  hitherto  regarded  them.  They 
serve  essentially  to  strengthen  our  present  argu- 
ment. They  are  among  those  striking  and  deci- 
sive proofs,  which  the  Gospels  everywhere  furnish, 


284  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

of  the  fact  that  their  writers  had  no  purpose  of 
deceiving  by  the  display  of  an  imaginary  character. 
It  is  evident  that  they  had  no  powers  and  no 
habits  of  mind  which  would  lead  them  to  attempt, 
or  which  would  enable  them,  if  they  did  attempt, 
to  produce  an  effect  upon  the  minds  of  men  by  a 
correct  and  striking  exhibition  of  beautiful  imagi- 
nations and  ideas  of  their  own,  well  disposed  and 
fitted  to  each  other.  But  it  is,  perhaps,  even  more 
evident  that  they  had  no  purpose  of  this  sort ;  for, 
with  this  purpose,  they  would  never  have  inserted 
narratives  like  those  on  which  we  have  been  com- 
menting, which  present  at  first  view  such  difficul- 
ties, and  are  so  liable  to  objection.  They  could 
have  had  no  motive  for  inserting  them  but  the 
truth.  So  far  from  accommodating  their  narrative 
to  any  abstract  conception  of  what  a  divine  teacher 
ought  to  be,  they  seem  never  to  have  formed  an 
abstract  conception  of  wiiat  the  character  of  Christ 
really  was.  They  give  no  summary  view  of  it ;  they 
do  not  attempt  to  generalize  their  observations  in 
a  single  instance.  They  afford  us  no  knowledge 
of  it  except  by  their  very  brief  accounts  of  what 
he  did  and  what  he  said,  and  of  what  was  done 
and  said  by  others  in  relation  to  him.  In  these 
accounts  their  style  is  inartificial  and  defective. 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  285 

They  write  like  uneducated  men,  to  whom  com- 
position is  an  unusual  and  difficult  effort,  and 
who,  on  account  of  the  labor  of  writing,  express 
themselves  but  imperfectly,  omit  all  that  is  not 
essential,  and  leave  much  unexplained  that  re- 
quires explanation.  Acquainted  with  all  the  par- 
ticular circumstances  of  each  event  which  they 
relate,  they  seem  never  to  have  placed  themselves 
in  the  situation  of  readers  to  whom  these  circum- 
stances might  not  be  known,  nor  to  have  consid- 
ered how  the  narrative  might  appear  to  them,  or 
what  difficulties  and  objections  might  arise  in  their 
minds.  There  are  the  most  evident  marks  of  the 
absence  of  all  contrivance  and  all  aim  at  effect. 
They  give  no  explanations,  except  a  very  few  quite 
unimportant.  They  scarcely  make  any  comments, 
or  point  out  anything  to  the  observation  of  the 
reader.  No  composition  was  ever  more  inartifi- 
cially  put  together  than  their  histories.  They 
seem  never  to  have  had  a  thought  of  making  one 
thing  so  bear  upon  and  illustrate  another  as  to 
produce  a  harmonious  whole.  When  we  find, 
therefore,  that  from  their  entire  narratives,  viewed 
either  separately  or  together,  there  results  a  most 
wonderful,  original,  and  consistent  exhibition  of 
character,  it  is  impossible  to  ascribe  this  to  any 
other  cause  than  that  they  drew  from  reality. 


286  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

There  is,  without  doubt,  an  air  of  perfect  sim- 
plicity and  truth,  which  gives  a  charm  to  these 
writings,  in  the  absence  of  all  the  common  excel- 
lences of  composition.  But  the  character  which 
belongs  to  them  is  not,  perhaps,  that  which  we 
might  at  first  view  expect  or  desire.  We  may  be 
tempted  to  wish  that  the  life  and  doctrines  of 
Jesus  Christ  had  been  described  and  explained  by 
such  writers  as  Xenophon  and  Plato.  But  the 
wise  providence  of  God  has  ordered  it  otherwise ; 
and  has  so  ordered  it,  that  the  records  of  our  relig- 
ion carry  with  them  independent  evidence  of  their 
own  authenticity.  We  are  compelled  to  believe 
that  what  the  Evangelists  have  told  us  is  true,  be- 
cause their  very  writings  afford  satisfactory  proof 
that  they  had  no  ability  to  conceive  and  describe 
what  they  have  told  us,  if  it  had  not  been  true. 
The  genius  of  Xenophon  might  have  enabled  him 
to  imagine  and  delineate  the  character  which  he 
has  ascribed  to  Socrates  ;  and  there  is  nothing  in 
the  discourses  of  his  master  which  transcends  the 
powers  of  the  disciple.  In  believing  his  account, 
therefore,  wre  have  to  rely  upon  his  veracity,  for 
which  we  think  we  have  sufficient  evidence,  and 
which  we  find  confirmed  by  some  collateral  testi- 
mony. But  as  regards  the  writers  of  the  Gospels, 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE   GOSPELS.  287 

we  have  not  only  other  and  much  stronger  proof 
of  their  veracity,  but  we  have,  still  further,  proof 
of  their  entire  inability  to  have  conceived  and 
exhibited  the  character  and  discourses  of  Christ 
by  any  effort  of  their  own  power.  They  must 
be  simple  historians,  because  the  splendid  fiction 
which  we  have  otherwise  to  suppose,  if  it  lies 
within  the  possible  limits  of  human  genius,  was 
very  far  removed  from  the  sphere  of  their  minds. 

I  HAVE  referred  to  one  other  passage  beside 
those  which  I  have  noticed,  as  seeming  to  me  to 
present  a  difficulty.  It  is  the  cry  of  our  Saviour 
on  the  cross,  which  is  rendered  in  the  Common 
Version,  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  for- 
saken me  1 "  *  These  wrords  may  appear,  at  first 
sight,  to  be  a  mere  exclamation,  forced  from  him 
by  the  extremity  of  torture,  and  having  something 
of  the  character  of  impatience  and  complaint.  If 
this  were  so,  all  that  could  be  said  would  be,  that 
his  strength  failed  for  a  moment  under  the  most 
excruciating  sufferings.  But  I  am,  for  various  rea- 
sons, persuaded  that  the  words  uttered  by  Christ 
are  not  to  be  so  considered.  In  the  first  place, 

*  Matthew  xxvii.  46 ;  Mark  xv.  34. 


288        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

such  an  expression  is  inconsistent  with  his  char- 
acter as  it  always  appears  elsewhere,  and  particu- 
larly with  those  striking  proofs  of  fortitude  and 
self-possession  which  he  really  exhibited  during 
his  last  sufferings.  In  the  next  place,  it  seems  to 
me  repugnant  to  the  strongest  principles  of  human 
nature,  that  he  should  have  uttered  these  words  in 
the  sense  supposed.  His  cross  was  surrounded  by 
enemies,  reviling  and  insulting  him,  and  taunting 
him  with  being  abandoned  by  God.  Supposing 
his  self-command  not  to  have  been  entirely  broken 
down,  it  must  have  been  abhorrent  to  every  feeling 
and  to  every  motive  which  might  act  upon  his 
mind  for  him  to  heighten  their  triumph  and  to 
harden  them  in  their  guilt,  by  proclaiming  with  a 
loud  voice  a  sense  of  his  being  forsaken  by  God. 
But,  in  the  last  place,  I  think  the  words  admit  of 
a  very  different  explanation,  suited  to  his  character 
and  to  the  circumstances  in  which  they  were  ut- 
tered. We  may  first  observe,  then,  that  the  word 
"forsaken,"  which  stands  in  the  Common  Version 
and  in  all  the  other  principal  English  translations 
into  which  I-have  looked,  does  not  correspond  to 
the  original  word.  It  has  an  associated,  secon- 
dary meaning,  which  that  word,  as  I  conceive,  is 
not  intended  to  express.  "  To  forsake "  a  person 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  289 

means,  not  simply  to  leave  him,  but  to  leave  him 
through  indifference  or  dislike,  or  from  the  opera- 
tion of  some  selfish  feeling,  as  fear  of  common 
danger;  but  the  term  in  the  original  has  not 
necessarily  this  meaning.  The  words  of  Christ, 
therefore,  should  be  rendered  without  convey- 
ing this  associated  idea:  "My  God!  my  God! 
why  hast  thou  left  me?"  These  are  the  first 
words  of  the  twenty-second  Psalm ;  and  we  must 
here  recollect  several  circumstances  which  may 
not  at  once  occur  to  the  mind.  First,  David  was 
regarded  by  the  Jews  with  the  highest  veneration. 
He  was  considered  as  a  type  of  the  Messiah ;  and 
many  of  his  Psalms  were  viewed  by  them  as  appli- 
cable to  himself,  indeed,  in  their  primary  sense, 
but,  in  their  secondary  and  higher  sense,  as  pro- 
phetic of  the  Messiah.  Secondly,  the  Jews  were 
so  familiar  with  their  Scriptures,  and  especially 
with  the  Psalms,  that  the  quotation  of  a  small 
portion  of  a  passage  was  sufficient  to  remind 
them  of  the  remainder.  The  first  verse  of  a 
Psalm  would  bring  the  whole  to  their  recollec- 
tion. Thirdly,  they  were  strongly  disposed  to 
consider  temporal  prosperity  and  affliction  as 
proofs  of  the  favor  and  of  the  displeasure  of  God. 
The  very  circumstance  that  Christ  was  suffering 

25 


290        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

so  ignominious  and  cruel  a  death  was,  in  their 
state  of  feeling  towards  him,  sufficient  proof  to 
them  that  he- was  an  object  of  God's  wrath.  Even 
the  faith  of  most  of  his  disciples  was,  there  is  no 
doubt,  prostrated,  at  least  for  a  season,  by  thus 
seeing  their  Messiah  expiring  in  torture  amid  the 
triumph  of  his  enemies.  A  crucified  Messiah! 
There  was  no  conception  at  which  a  Jew  would 
have  revolted  with  greater  horror. 

This  being  the  state  of  mind  of  those  by  whom 
his  cross  was  surrounded,  our  Saviour  called  out 
with  a  loud  voice,  "  My  God !  my  God !  why  hast 
thou  left  me  ?  "  What  would  be  the  natural  effect 
of  this  exclamation  upon  the  multitude  ?  It  at 
once  brought  to  their  minds  the  whole  Psalm, 
many  parts  of  which  were  so  strikingly  applicable 
to  the  sufferer  before  them.  They  would  under- 
stand him  as  applying  these  passages  to  himself. 
Yet  this  Psalm  they  believed  to  have  been  written 
by  David,  and  that  monarch  was  the  type  of  the 
Messiah.  Was  it  so  certain,  then,  that  he  who 
could  adopt  and  apply  to  himself  the  words  of  Da- 
vid was  an  object  of  God's  displeasure]  Was  it 
certain  that  he  was  not  the  Messiah  ?  Why  did 
his  sufferings,  any  more  than  the  sufferings  of 
David,  prove  him  to  be  an  outcast  from  God? 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  291 

But  the  words  themselves  are  the  language  of 
strong  habitual  trust  in  the  favor  of  God.  This 
feeling  is  expressed  in  the  repetition  of  the  address, 
"  My  God,  my  God."  Imagine  a  sinner,  a  male- 
factor, such  as  the  Jews  believed  our  Saviour  to 
be,  thus  addressing  the  Almighty,  and  you  cannot 
but  be  struck  with  the  entire  inconsistency  of 
the  address  with  such  a  character.  "Why  hast 
thou  left  me?"  That  is,  Why  hast  thou  left  me 
to  suffer?  The  form  of  expostulation  is  to  be 
referred  to  the  bold  and  passionate  style  of  the 
East,  and  the  simple  meaning  is  nothing  more 
than  what  we  should  express  in  colder  language 
by  saying,  "  It  is  through  thy  appointment,  O  God, 
that  I  suffer."  In  using  the  words  which  he  did, 
our  Saviour  adopted  the  language  of  David  for 
the  purpose  of  bringing  the  whole  Psalm  from 
which  he  quoted  to  the  minds  of  those  who  heard 
him.  In  this  Psalm  there  are  strong  expressions 
of  confidence  in  God,  and  the  words  themselves, 
which  he  uttered  so  that  all  around  him  might 
hear,  were  meant,  not  to  express  a  sense  of  his 
being  forsaken,  but  to  convey  to  them  the  senti- 
ment of  his  habitual  trust  in  God,  and  his  knowl- 
edge that  his  sufferings  were  by  God's  appointment. 
Such,  I  believe,  would  be  the  natural  effect  of  his 


292  GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS. 

words ;  what  I  have  stated  being  their  true  sense. 
An  address  to  God  like  that  made  by  Christ 
would  be  wholly  incongruous  in  the  mouth  of  a 
person  who  did  not  feel  that  he  was  habitually  an 
object  of  God's  peculiar  care  and  favor.  The  very 
form  of  expostulation  marks  its  character  in  this 
respect  more  strongly.  The  words  were  uttered 
by  Christ,  like  his  prayer  on  another  occasion,  "for 
the  sake  of  the  people  who  stood  by,  that  they 
might  believe  that  God  had  sent  him."  Just  be- 
fore expiring  he  thus  professed,  for  the  last  time, 
what  he  had  in  his  ministry  such  frequent  occa- 
sion to  profess,  his  confidence  in  God,  and  his 
reference  of  all  his  actions  and  sufferings  to  Him. 


APPENDIX. 


APPENDIX. 


ON  THE  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  DISCOURSES  OF  CHRIST 
TO  THE  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITION  OF  THE  JEWS, 
AND  TO  THE  CIRCUMSTANCES  IN  WHICH  HE  WAS 
PLACED. 

A  CONSIDERATION  of  the  character  and  condition 
of  the  people  to  whom  our  Lord  was  sent,  and  of 
the  circumstances  in  which  he  was  placed,  is  neces- 
sary to  the  formation  of  correct  views  respecting 
the  design  and  the  excellence  of  his  discourses  as 
a  teacher  of  religion  and  morality.  His  teachings 
will  excite  much  stronger  admiration  when  we 
consider  them  in  these  relations,  than  when  we 
regard  them  merely  in  the  abstract,  as  general 
commendations  or  precepts  of  virtue  and  piety. 
In  the  former  case,  we  shall  perceive  not  merely 
their  intrinsic  excellence,  but  also  their  excellence 
of,  propriety  and  adaptation.  We  shall  perceive 
why  some  virtues  were  particularly  selected  and 


296  INTEENAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

insisted  upon ;  and  the  character,  the  feelings,  and 
the  purposes  of  our  Saviour  will  appear  in  bolder 
relief  and  more  striking  colors,  when  contrasted 
with  those  of  the  persons  whom  he  was  addressing. 
I  propose,  therefore,  to  give  a  sketch  of  the  char- 
acter and  condition  of  the  Jewish  people  at  the 
time  when  our  Saviour  commenced  his  ministry, 
and  to  illustrate  what  I  have  been  saying  by 
pointing  out  the  reference  which  he  had  to  their 
feelings  and  expectations  in  those  declarations, 
commonly  called  the  Beatitudes,  with  which  he 
began  his  public  instructions. 

THE  Jews  had  been  separated  by  God  from  the 
rest  of  mankind,  and  had  received  a  religion  from 
him,  the  foundation  of  which  was  a  knowledge  of 
his  existence,  his  unity,  and  his  supremacy.  They 
had  not  been  made  acquainted  with  a  future  state 
of  retribution  by  direct  and  express  revelation.  In 
the  time  of  our  Saviour  their  notions  of  religion 
were  very  imperfect  and  erroneous.  This  was  the 
case  even  in  respect  to  the  character  of  God,  though 
they  were  especially  proud  of  the  distinction  of  be- 
ing the  only  people  to  whom  God  was  known.  The 
representations  of  him  by  the  Jewish  Rabbis,  and 
their  stories  concerning  him,  as  they  have  come 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  297 

down  to  us,  are  extremely  low  and  unworthy. 
Many  of  them  are  such  as  could  never  have  been 
tolerated  by  men  who  had  any  just  conceptions  of 
the  Almighty.  In  respect  to  his  power  and  domin- 
ion, they  considered  him  as  the  God  of  the  world ; 
but  in  all  other  respects  they  seem  to  have  viewed 
him  as  their  national  god.  They  appear,  gener- 
ally speaking,  to  have  had  no  belief  that  his  care 
and  goodness  extended  beyond  themselves,  and 
that  his  favor  toward  men  was  regulated  only  by 
a  consideration  of  their  moral  desert.  They  seem 
never  to  have  conceived  of  him  as  the  common 
Father  of  mankind.  Scarcely  anything  in  Chris- 
tianity appears  to  have  given  them  more  offence, 
than  its  being  a  revelation  of  his  impartial  good- 
ness, —  its  representing  the  Gentiles  as  equally 
with  themselves  the  objects  of  his  care,  and  equally 
capable  with  themselves  of  obtaining  his  favor. 

As  to  the  doctrine  of  a  future  life,  it  was  re- 
jected, as  is  well  known,  by  the  Sadducees,  a  sect 
which  comprehended  the  principal  part  of  the 
more  opulent  and  noble  among  the  Jews.  The 
Pharisees,  however,  who  were  the  leaders  of  the 
common  people  in  their  religious  opinions,  be- 
lieved in  a  future  state  of  retribution,  on  which 
men  were  to  enter  immediately  after  death.  It  is 


298        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

not  easy  to  ascertain  their  precise  opinions  respect- 
ing this  subject ;  but  there  is  no  doubt  that  they 
were  essentially  different  from  those  of  an  enlight- 
ened Christian.  They  probably  believed  in  the 
doctrine  of  transmigration. 

The  notions  of  the  majority  of  the  Jews  concern- 
ing moral  and  religious  excellence  were  extremely 
incorrect.  What  they  were  appears  from  the 
character  of  the  Pharisees ;  for  the  Pharisees  were 
commonly  regarded  as  their  most  holy  men.  The 
nation  in  general,  in  the  time  of  our  Saviour,  was 
infected  with  the  universal  corruption  of  the  age. 
Their  wickedness,  at  a  somewhat  later  period,  is 
described  in  the  very  strongest  language  by  their 
own  historian,  Josephus.  In  the  times,  however, 
which  immediately  preceded  the  coming  of  our 
Saviour,  I  believe  that  a  large  proportion  of  all 
the  virtue  and  religion  which  existed  in  the  world 
was  to  be  found  in  Judaea.  Certainly  there  was 
then  quite  as  much  at  Jerusalem  as  could  have 
been  discovered  at  Rome  under  the  reign  of  Tibe- 
rius. 

In  regard  to  the  political  condition  of  the  Jews 
in  the  time  of  our  Saviour's  ministry,  they  were 
subject  to  the  power  of  the  Romans ;  Judsea  had 
been  converted  into  a  Roman  province,  and  its  in- 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE   GOSPELS.  299 

habitants  were  compelled  to  pay  tribute.  They  en- 
dured, in  common  with  the  other  nations  subject  to 
Rome,  the  misery  of  one  of  those  provincial  govern- 
ments, which,  for  the  most  part,  were  active  and 
vigilant  in  nothing  but  oppression  and  rapacity. 
There  were,  however,  peculiar  aggravations  of  the 
hardship  of  their  condition.  They  regarded  them- 
selves as  the  sole  favorites  of  Heaven,  and  as  a  peo- 
ple far  superior  to  the  rest  of  mankind,  whom  they 
spoke  of  as  "  dogs  "  and  "  sinners,"  and  hated  with 
a  religious  hatred.  The  hatred  which  they  felt  to- 
ward other  nations  was  returned  with  a  full  meas- 
ure of  contempt  and  aversion.  We  scarcely  find  a 
mention  of  them  in  any  heathen  author  which  is 
not  accompanied  with  some  expression  of  these 
feelings.  In  being  subject  to  heathen  masters, 
therefore,  they  were  exposed  to  peculiar  sufferings 
from  insults  offered  to  their  religion,  and  from  ridi- 
cule cast  upon  their  pretensions.  Such  servitude 
they  felt  not  merely  as  oppression,  but  as  pollu- 
tion; and,  in  respect  to  the  Roman  government, 
they  hung  upon  the  brink  of  rebellion,  ready  to 
receive  an  impulse  from  any  hand. 

They  were,  however,  anxiously  expecting  a  de- 
liverer of  no  common  character.  Oppressed  and 
afflicted,  they  were  looking  forward  to  the  coming 


300        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

of  their  Messiah,  as  the  termination  of  their  suffer- 
ings, and  the  commencement  of  glory  and  triumph. 
He  was  to  be  the  dispenser  of  those  high  blessings 
which  God  had  so  long  delayed ;  he  was  the  hope 
of  "  all  who  were  expecting  deliverance  in  Jerusa- 
lem"; he  was  "  to  save  his  people,"  and  "  to  restore 
the  kingdom  to  Israel " ;  and  his  coming  was  to  be 
attended  with  the  most  wonderful  prodigies,  and 
the  most  extraordinary  revolutions.  The  kingdom 
which  the  great  body  of  the  Jews  expected,  "  the 
kingdom  of  God,"  "  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,"  "  the 
kingdom  of  the  Messiah,"  was  not  such  a  kingdom 
as  we  Christians  understand  to  be  expressed  by 
those  words.  It  was  a  temporal  kingdom,  to  be 
founded  on  conquest.  Their  Messiah  was  to  be  a 
prince  and  a  warrior,  not  merely  to  deliver  them 
from  subjection  to  the  Romans,  but  to  make  them 
masters  of  the  world.  He  was  to  come  "  with  gar- 
ments rolled  in  blood,"  "  to  tread  the  wine-press 
alone,  to  tread  the  nations  in  his  anger,  and  to 
trample  them  in  his  fury."  The  descendant  of 
David  was  to  darken  the  glory  of  his  ancestors 
with  the  new  splendor  which  he  would  cast 
around  their  throne.  He  was  to  establish  his 
residence  at  Jerusalem,  and  that  city  was  to  be 
the  metropolis  of  the  world. 


GENUINENESS   OF   THE   GOSPELS.  301 

IT  was  among  this  people,  thus  oppressed  and 
afflicted,  and  thus  anxiously  waiting  for  a  deliv- 
erer, that  John  the  Baptist  appeared  to  announce 
that  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  was  at  hand.  The 
expected  time  was  at  last  arriving.  He  performed 
no  miracles  to  confirm  his  declaration  ;  and  yet  it 
is  not  wonderful  that  multitudes  flocked  to  him, 
whose  numbers  are  thus  expressed  by  the  Evan- 
gelist, in  the  style  of  Eastern  hyperbole :  "  Then 
went  out  to  him  Jerusalem  and  all  Judsea  and  all 
the  country  about  the  Jordan."  The  people  were 
not  surprised,  perhaps,  at  his  preaching  of  reforma- 
tion, for  they  might  think  that  some  change  and 
reformation  of  character  were  necessary  to  prepare 
them  for  the  reception  of  their  Messiah.  But  the 
teachers  of  the  Law  and  the  Pharisees  felt,  without 
doubt,  no  less  wonder  than  exasperation  at  the 
language  of  severe  rebuke  in  which  he  addressed 
them.  His  preaching  must  have  roused  the  peo- 
ple, and  tended  to  produce  in  them  a  disposition 
to  commence  resistance  to  the  tyranny  which  they 
hoped  soon  to  overturn.  The  exciting  character 
of  the  preaching  of  John,  and  the  fear  of  popular 
commotions  in  consequence  of  it,  were  probably 
among  the  principal  causes,  as  they  are  stated  to 
have  been  by  Josephus,  of  his  being  cast  into 


2G 


302  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

prison  by  Herod  Antipas,  and  of  his  being  put  to 
death.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  the  immediate  oc- 
casion of  his  death  according  to  the  account  of  the 
Evangelists  was  only  a  concerted  artifice,  by  which 
Herod  meant  to  screen  himself  from  some  of  the 
odium  of  the  action,  and  to  assume  the  appearance 
of  doing  it  reluctantly. 

Before  his  death,  however,  the  Baptist  had  ful- 
filled his  office,  and  pointed  out  the  founder  of  the 
kingdom  which  he  had  announced.  This  was  a 
young  man  of  Galilee,  a  provincial  part  of  Judaea, 
—  a  citizen  of  Nazareth,  a  town  proverbially  de- 
spised,—the  reputed  son  of  a  carpenter.  We  may 
conceive  of  him  as  appearing  in  the  simple  dress 
of  a  Jewish  peasant,  the  same,  probably,  as  is  still 
worn  in  that  part  of  the  East  where  he  was  born. 
We  may  represent  him  to  ourselves  with  that  ex- 
pression of  countenance,  and  that  air  and  manner, 
which  must  have  been  produced  by  the  conscious- 
ness that  he  came  into  the  world  as  the  chosen  mes- 
senger of  God,  under  his  immediate  and  sensible 
direction,  with  but  a  single  purpose  to  accomplish, 
and  that  purpose  high,  solemn,  and  important  be- 
yond all  example.  He  must  have  had  an  habitual 
seriousness  and  intentness  of  mind,  and  perhaps 
something  of  melancholy  in  his  appearance,  for 


GENUINENESS   OF  THE   GOSPELS.  303 

there  was  always  distinctly  in  his  view  a  short  life 
of  toil  and  suffering  and  opposition,  to  be  termi- 
nated by  a  death  the  most  cruel  and  ignominious. 
He  must  have  had  an  air  of  abstraction  and  disen- 
gagement from  the  world,  the  appearance  of  a 
being  who  had  come  here  only  on  some  purpose 
of  mercy.  For  he  was  separated  and  set  apart 
from  mankind,  he  was  in  a  great  measure  cut  off 
from  human  sympathy  and  support,  by  the  sublime 
peculiarity  of  his  office,  by  his  moral  and  intellect- 
ual superiority,  and  by  the  absence  of  personal 
interest  in  the  common  pursuits  of  men.  In  his 
expressions  of  benevolence  and  friendship,  there 
must  have  been  that  gentleness  and  mildness 
which  are  produced  by  freedom  from  all  vulgar 
feelings  and  selfish  affections,  something  of  the 
compassion  of  a  superior  intelligence  mingling 
with  the  kindness  of  a  friend,  —  a  manner  of 
which  perhaps  we  may  see  a  resemblance  in  the 
best  of  men,  when  their  minds  are  softened  by  sor- 
row and  raised  above  the  world  by  religion. 

He  commenced  his  ministry  in  Galilee,  without 
at  first  declaring  its  full  purpose,  because  this  ac- 
corded so  little  with  the  expectations  of  the  Jews 
that  it  could  not  have  been  at  once  made  known, 
without  exciting  passions  by  which  his  ministry 


304        INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

would  have  been  immediately  interrupted.  He 
only  announced,  as  John  the  Baptist  had  done, 
that  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  was  at  hand,  and 
performed  miracles  in  proof  of  his  being  the  min- 
ister of  God,  without  expressly  declaring  himself 
to  be  the  Messiah.  "And  great  multitudes  fol- 
lowed him  from  Galilee  and  Decapolis  and  Jeru 
salem  and  Judsea,  and  from  the  country  beyond 
the  Jordan."  Having  collected  a  few  who  joined 
themselves  to  him  in  a  particular  manner  as  his 
disciples,  he  ascended  a  mountain,  or  "  the  moun- 
tain," as  it  is  expressed  by  the  Evangelist,  —  that 
is,  either  Mount  Tabor,  or  some  other  well-known 
mountain  near  Capernaum,  —  to  deliver  instruc- 
tion to  his  followers.  "And  when  he  had  sat 
down,"  —  the  usual  posture  in  which  the  Jewish 
doctors  taught,  —  his  disciples  placed  themselves 
near  him,  and  the  multitude  by  which  he  was 
attended  gathered  round. 

If,  then,  there  had  been  in  all  this  multitude  one 
man  of  high  intellectual  views  and  moral  feelings, 
—  one  man  among  these  Jews  such  as  Plato  was 
among  the  Heathens,  —  who  had  just  notions  of 
the  impartial  goodness  of  God  and  of.  the  charac- 
ter to  be  expected  in  the  Messiah,  and  who  had 
been  led  to  believe  that  Jesus  was  indeed  this  last 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.  305 

and  greatest  messenger  from  God,  with  what  deep 
and  anxious  expectation  must  he  have  listened  to 
the  discourse  now  about  to  he  delivered.  "  If  he 
flatter  the  prejudices  of  this  people,"  such  an  ob- 
server might  have  said  to  himself,  "if  he  add 
excitement  to  their  passions,  if  he  urge  them  on 
to  those  objects  which  they  now  have  full  in  view, 
if  he  propose  himself  as  their  leader,  he  is  not  the 
Messiah,  he  is  not  a  messenger  from  GocJ;  his 
miracles  are  concerted  frauds,  or  they  are  perhaps 
the  work  of  evil  daemons."  He  would  not  have 
listened  long,  however,  before  all  doubt  and  anxi- 
ety would  have  vanished  from  his  mind.  To  this 
multitude  of  Jews,  the  obstinacy  of  whose  pride 
no  humiliations  could  subdue ;  who  gloried  in  their 
knowledge  of  God,  and  regarded  themselves  as  a 
holy  people,  the  objects  of  his  peculiar  favor ;  who 
thanked  God  that  they  were  not  as  other  men,  but 
that  they  were  "Abraham's  children,"  "Jews  by 
birth,  and  not  sinners  of  the  Gentiles  " ;  —  to  this 
multitude  the  first  address  of  Jesus  Christ  was, 
"  Blessed  are  they  who  feel  their  spiritual  wants, 
for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  Heaven." — They  to 
whom  he  was  speaking  were  full  of  the  expecta- 
tion of  the  highest  temporal  glory  and  prosperity 
about  to  flow  in  upon  their  nation,  and  were  gen- 

26* 


306  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE 

erally  in  the  habit  of  regarding  such  prosperity  as 
a  pledge  of  the  favor  of  God;  but  the  enjoyment 
of  this  was  not  to  be  the  lot  of  his  disciples ;  and 
he  proceeds,  "  Blessed  are  the  mourners,  for  they 
will  be  comforted."  —  The  Jews  were  full  of  deep 
resentments  and  angry  passions ;  their  hopes  were 
fixed  upon  a  Messiah  who  should  be  a  warlike 
prince,  who  should  inspire  his  followers  with  a 
martial  spirit  and  heroic  courage,  and  lead  them 
under  his  banner  to  inflict  vengeance  upon  their  en- 
emies and  to  subdue  the  world ;  and  their  Messiah 
had  come  at  last  to  declare,  "  Blessed  are  the  mild, 
for  they  will  inherit  the  land."  —  In  those  whose 
minds  had  been  already  affected  by  the  preaching 
of  John  the  Baptist  and  of  our  Saviour,  boundless 
desires  of  worldly  pleasures  had  been  excited,  and 
had  been  made  eager  by  what  seemed  the  near 
prospect  of  their  gratification.  It  was  not  with 
such  desires,  however,  that  the  kingdom  of  Heaven 
was  to  be  entered.  "  Blessed  are  they  who  hunger 
and  thirst  for  righteousness,  for  they  will  be  satis- 
fied." —  The  Jews  confined  their  humane  feelings 
to  those  of  their  own  nation,  and  were  looking 
for  their  own  glory  to  be  accomplished  amid  the 
punishment  and  misery  of  the  rest  of  mankind. 
"  Blessed,"  says  our  Saviour,  "  are  the  compassion- 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       307 

ate,  for  they  will  receive  compassion."  —  They 
made  merit  to  consist  principally  in  the  strict 
observance  of  ceremonies  ordained  by  their  Law 
or  by  their  traditions,  in  the  practice  of  austeri- 
ties, in  legal  purity,  and  in  frequent  ablutions; 
and  the  Pharisees  taught  that  there  was  no  guilt 
in  desires,  or  even  intentions,  but  in  actions  only. 
It  was  a  very  different  morality  that  was  taught 
by  Jesus,  a  morality  which  flattered  none  of  their 
prejudices  or  passions:  "Blessed  are  the  pure 
in  heart,  for  they  will  see  God."  —  They  were 
ready  to  engage  in  rebellion,  and  were  looking 
for  wars  of  desolation  and  conquest.  Jesus  said 
to  them,  "  Blessed  are  the  peacemakers,  for  they 
will  be  sons  of  God."  —  They  did  not  perhaps 
suppose  that  the  commencement  of  the  reign  of 
the  Messiah  would  be  free  from  difficulty  and  toil 
and  suffering,  either  to  himself  or  to  his  followers  ; 
but  they  expected  a  full  recompense  upon  earth. 
Nothing  could  be  further  from  their  thoughts 
than  that  his  followers  should  spend  their  lives 
as  preachers  of  a  new  religion,  enduring  continual 
persecution  and  suffering,  and  looking  for  their 
reward  only  beyond  the  grave;  or  that  their  Mes- 
siah should  begin  his  ministry  with  the  declara- 
tion, "  Blessed  are  they  who  are  persecuted  for 


308  INTERNAL  EVIDENCES   OF  THE 

righteousness'  sake,  for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of 
Heaven.  Blessed  will  you  be  when  men  shall 
revile  you,  and  persecute  you,  and  speak  all  evil 
against  you,  falsely,  for  my  sake." 

THE  remainder  of  the  discourse  of  our  Saviour, 
like  the  part  we  have  been  considering,  ought  to 
be  viewed  in  connection  with  the  moral  and  intel- 
lectual state  of  those  to  whom  it  was  addressed. 
When  it  is  viewed  in  such  a  connection,  we  shall 
see  at  once  that  he  by  whom  it  was  delivered  was 
not  an  impostor,  promoting  and  taking  advantage 
of  the  prevalent  notions  respecting  the  Messiah 
and  his  kingdom,  nor  a  fanatic  borne  away  by 
the  popular  enthusiasm.  He  appears  throughout 
patiently  endeavoring  to  correct  the  errors  of  the 
multitude,  to  enlighten  their  understandings,  to 
rectify  their  passions,  to  change  the  whole  charac- 
ter of  their  feelings  and  motives.  And  who  is  this 
extraordinary  teacher  whose  mind  is  of  so  much 
higher  an  order  than  the  minds  of  all  those  by 
whom  he  is  surrounded  ?  If  he  be  a  mere  human 
teacher,  speaking  from  himself  alone,  he  is  noth- 
ing more  than  a  peasant  of  Galilee,  the  son  of  a 
carpenter.  But,  though  in  the  midst  of  men  gross, 
sensual,  uninformed,  unprincipled,  his  morality  is 


GENUINENESS  OF  THE  GOSPELS.       309 

the  most  pure,  correct,  and  sublime ;  his  views  of 
duty  are  the  most  rational  and  comprehensive;  not 
only  does  he  transcend,  beyond  all  comparison,  the 
rulers  and  teachers  of  his  own  nation,  but  it  is  the 
highest  praise  of  the  best  philosophers  of  ancient 
times,  of  Socrates  and  of  Cicero,  that  their  notions 
of  religion  and  duty  have  some  imperfect  resem- 
blance to  those  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  Let  us 
examine  his  discourse.  We  shall  discover  no 
selfish  purpose  or  object.  He  by  whom  it  was 
delivered  certainly  had  no  design  to  take  advan- 
tage of  the  passions  and  prejudices  of  his  hearers 
in  order  to  pass  himself  off  for  their  Messiah. 
It  is  all  in  direct  opposition  to  those  passions  and 
prejudices.  Its  object  cannot  be  mistaken.  It  is 
not  to  make  them  subservient  to  any  purpose  of 
his  own ;  it  is  only  to  make  them  wise  and  virtu- 
ous and  holy.  It  is  not  to  gain  followers  to  him- 
self; it  is  only  to  lead  them  back  to  their  duty  and 
to  God.  Is  there  any  solution  that  will  account 
for  the  appearance  of  a  teacher  so  extraordinary  in 
an  obscure  part  of  Judaea  I  There  is  one,  and  but 
one.  He  was  what  he  claimed  to  be.  He  was  a 
teacher  commissioned  and  instructed  by  God. 

THE    END. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


23May52SB 


10FebS4MO 
JS*2 


IN  STACKS 
OCT 


M 


6 
3R 


^C 

^8  1983 


B  1981 
BY 


LD  21-95m-ll,'50(2877slG).176 


YC  I 0  i 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


